No, it's not. As soon as I saw the diagram, I thought Black could play ...f6 and maybe win a pawn because of the pin. Then I looked at the Analysis and ...f6 is the best move, but it's only about a -0.45 advantage for Black.
Check my picture. The engine literally counted it as blunder.
A blunder is when you get a very bad position or lose a piece. White doesn't get either here. He gets a slightly worse position after ...f6. I've seen the Analysis. He might lose a pawn, but that's a number of moves down the track.
Again, check the picture I sent. Engine says that it is a blunder. Whether you believe it is a blunder or not, doesn’t make a difference. I am asking here why does the engine says it is a blunder?
Very often it can be shown that the engine's move is a blunder, even though it rates its own move higher than a "human" move. At other times, the engine rates its own move as "best", even though it clearly isn't best because a human might discern a foolproof pathway to the desired result (a win or a draw) which, however, might be 20 moves longer than the engine's pathway. However, a human might play the better method faster than the engine's preference, even though the better one is 20 moves longer.
It's not a blunder. You should recheck your engine. Any move that Black plays after Nf3 is some sort of advantage for White, except for ...f6 which is a slight advantage for Black.
It's not a blunder. You should recheck your engine. Any move that Black plays after Nf3 is some sort of advantage for White, except for ...f6 which is a slight advantage for Black.
Again, check the picture I sent. Engine says that it is a blunder. Whether you believe it is a blunder or not, doesn’t make a difference. I am asking here why does the engine says it is a blunder?
Only the programmer can answer this question.
You would have to know the conditions for each label (blunder, miss win, best move ect ).
What you can see are the main line calculated, but you do not have access on the layer on top who attribute the ranking.
As other mentioned don't take engine "mark" on each move to seriously. The mark are a good tool but they have like chess engine limitation.
If it doesn't tell you or show you the moves after that, then it's not a very powerful engine.
Yes I know what your point is. But I just wanted to check why the move considered blunder by the engine .
If it's not a powerful engine, which it probably isn't, then ?? can just mean a slight mistake.
Yes that’s what I am not getting. If it was labeled as a mistake then everything is fine. But maybe because it is a really powerful engine calculated the 30 moves after that, it said it is a blunder …
Yes I know what your point is. But I just wanted to check why the move considered blunder by the engine .
I showed you with the evaluation tool. for the engine that was not the optimal way to develop your piece.
Once again without knowing what are the condition for attributing each state you will never know why this is consider a blunder.
Something like
- From move 1 to 10 (opening)
- moving one piece with an eval inferior by more than 0.5 with another move
equal : blunder
I have no idea of the programming of course, but just telling that you do not have someone looking at the game as a whole and saying " that's a blunder for such and such reason"
It's not a blunder. You should recheck your engine. Any move that Black plays after Nf3 is some sort of advantage for White, except for ...f6 which is a slight advantage for Black.
I saw the actual game, and I think it really is cuz of what I said before, except now I see that castle was a very likely move. Cuz of that, bringing bishop out to d3 and then queen to h5 threatens checkmate in one move. And in the off chance that the opponent plays something else before castling, or doesn't castle at all, moving queen to g3 could give you a free pawn and maybe even rook. Therefore, I believe it said it was a blunder due to the fact that you missed a possible checkmate. And Idk for sure but someone up there said something about capturing queen with knight. If it's in denial to this strategy, there's a pawn defending that square. There's maybe only or two moves to defend it. One being h7 pawn to h6. Here you can play e5 pawn to e6, resulting in either queen capturing ur pawn or them taking ur pawn with the f7 pawn. To prevent them from taking with the queen, you're expected to move out ur own f2 pawn so that you can support this pawn. Also moving the knight out is good in and out of itself, cuz it can attack the f7 square and the h7 square at the same time.
TLDR; the reason it's a blunder is cuz it's a missed possible checkmate and a miss to better positional play (which I said above, so really the only new thing is that it's a missed possible checkmate.)
Until now, it seems it is a blunder because white will have better position. I guess I can take your answer as a reason for supporting the position.
Yes I know what your point is. But I just wanted to check why the move considered blunder by the engine .
I showed you with the evaluation tool. for the engine that was not the optimal way to develop your piece.
Once again without knowing what are the condition for attributing each state you will never know why this is consider a blunder.
Something like
- From move 1 to 10 (opening)
- moving one piece with an eval inferior by more than 0.5 with another move
equal : blunder
I have no idea of the programming of course, but just telling that you do not have someone looking at the game as a whole and saying " that's a blunder for such and such reason"
Actually after discussing with people why the engine counted it as blunder, I got many helpful things . Learning why helps a lot to understand.
There's no checkmate. After Bd3, instead of Nf3, Black can play ...Nh6 or ...Be6 and it's about +1 for White.
As mentioned before there is two things.
1 the chess engine who do calculation
2 a software on top that rank each move (best, good, missed win , ect )
If you do not know what are the conditions for a move to be put in one category or the other, you have no real way to know for sure why in some case.
But the analyze of the chess coach is clear when put into word " suboptimal way to develop the pieces" .
Once again do not read to much into this. First the engine are not perfect (especially on the server) and two the software who rank each move is also not perfect.
If the Coach calls Nf3 a blunder, giving Black a -0.75 advantage, he should be booted off chess.com. 
As mentioned before there is two things.
1 the chess engine who do calculation
2 a software on top that rank each move (best, good, missed win , ect )
If you do not know what are the conditions for a move to be put in one category or the other, you have no real way to know for sure why in some case.
But the analyze of the chess coach is clear when put into word " suboptimal way to develop the pieces" .
Once again do not read to much into this. First the engine are not perfect (especially on the server) and two the software who rank each move is also not perfect.
It is important. Like I said, I got many helpful information after discussing. I feel like I got better than before. And what the coach said wasn’t appearing to me actually.
/“If you do not know what are the conditions for a move to be put in one category or the other, you have no real way to know for sure why in some case. “/
We already know
No, it's not. As soon as I saw the diagram, I thought Black could play ...f6 and maybe win a pawn because of the pin. Then I looked at the Analysis and ...f6 is the best move, but it's only about a -0.45 advantage for Black.