Brilliant move? Really?!

Sort:
Poisson_Rouge

It's flattering and all but is this really a brilliant move?
 

1. d4 b6 2. Nf3 Bb7 3. Nc3 g6 4. e4 Bg7 5. Bc4 d6 6. Qe2 Nd7 7. Bg5 Ngf6 8. O-O-O c5 9. e5 dxe5 10. dxe5 Nh5 11. Bxf7+ Kxf7 12. e6+ Kg8 13. Rxd7 1-0

Seems too obvious to be called a brilliant move.
Especially since there's an immediate fork right after that at least guarantees you'll take back material after worsening your opponent position.
 
Rxd7 and followup are just the ice on the cake.
7.Bxf7!+ (that I missed) was more difficult to find.
justbefair

Chess.com has had computer programs set up to evaluate moves for years.  The original definition for "brilliant" moves was never posted but the concept required the position evaluation score to increase after a certain search depth had been reached.  This resulted in sometimes very obscure moves being declared "brilliant".     

After receiving many complaints,  a new set of rules was adopted for "brilliant" moves" in 2021.

  • Must include piece sacrifice
  • Best or near best move
  • Should not result in a bad position
  • Position should not be completely winning without the move
  • Adjusted for rating

They just do what they are told.

Brilliant (!!) moves and Great Moves are always the best or nearly best move in the position, but are also special in some way. We replaced the old Brilliant algorithm with a simpler definition: a Brilliant move is when you find a good piece sacrifice. There are some other conditions, like you should not be in a bad position after a Brilliant move and you should not be completely winning even if you had not found the move. Also, we are more generous in defining a piece sacrifice for newer players, compared with those who are higher rated. 

https://support.chess.com/article/2965-how-are-moves-classified-what-is-a-blunder-or-brilliant-and-etc

 

 

lawasserman
All it does is screw up 🆙 his castling
lawasserman
Didn’t mean to put emoji
lawasserman
Text did it for me
Poisson_Rouge
justbefair wrote:

Chess.com has had computer programs set up to evaluate moves for years.  The original definition for "brilliant" moves was never posted but the concept required the position evaluation score to increase after a certain search depth had been reached.  This resulted in sometimes very obscure moves being declared "brilliant".     

After receiving many complaints,  a new set of rules was adopted for "brilliant" moves" in 2021.

  • Must include piece sacrifice
  • Best or near best move
  • Should not result in a bad position
  • Position should not be completely winning without the move
  • Adjusted for rating

They just do what they are told.

Brilliant (!!) moves and Great Moves are always the best or nearly best move in the position, but are also special in some way. We replaced the old Brilliant algorithm with a simpler definition: a Brilliant move is when you find a good piece sacrifice. There are some other conditions, like you should not be in a bad position after a Brilliant move and you should not be completely winning even if you had not found the move. Also, we are more generous in defining a piece sacrifice for newer players, compared with those who are higher rated. 

https://support.chess.com/article/2965-how-are-moves-classified-what-is-a-blunder-or-brilliant-and-etc

 

 

"a Brilliant move is when you find a good piece sacrifice. "
It's a bit disappointing cause the way "brilliant" has been defined there is too broad and end up reducing the quality of such analysis.
Thanks for the explanation.