The quick analysis tool is quite useless

Here's a snippet of a quick analysis that the server gave me after finishing a bullet game. There's obviously something wrong!

The text is kind of unnecessary, and the overall assessment of the game is usually wildly inaccurate. If the game is interesting, I'll go over it on the analysis board with stockfish. But, normally, I don't care about a 1-word sentence that only occasionally correctly summarizes the game.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts about how useful/useless this feature is.

Are you quibbling over the differing uses of the word blunder?

lf we had the game in question, we could

help you make sense of your loss.

It is possible that the loss was not the result of a technical blunder, which they had defined as a move bringing about a 2 point negative swing in the evaluation, but instead a lesser mistake that brought about your downfall.

At any rate, a new greatly improved analysis is in beta and will save you the time of running stockfish and provide much useful analysis.

I was only giving an example of a sentence and the "result" that was clearly contradictory. Here is the complete analysis of the game in question (which I won as black, although there are just as many games I lost that also had unsatisfactory summaries): https://www.chess.com/live/game/3506226571

Also, I really question the sentence "a new greatly improved analysis is in beta and will save you the time of running stockfish and provide much useful analysis." How does one get useful analysis without simply taking the time to run stockfish? I personally don't mind taking 5-6 minutes to go over a classical game if I can trust that the analysis is accurate, and that I can understand exactly why my moves are mistakes, which I can figure out by going through stockfish's lines. Meanwhile, the quick summary doesn't achieve any of this.

Thanks for pointing out how some losses may come from the combination of many small errors though.

Part of the new analysis report in beta, which runs in seconds.

Well, sometimes the "best" move is also an "excellent" move...

/ And yes, the excellent through blunder for white still add up to 70 while the ones for black add to 71. 

// Houston, it looks like we have a problem. 

// Join the beta club.

Regarding the first post, yes, that sentence is sometimes wrong.

You can turn that nonsense off in your settings.  It's garbage to get you to "upgrade".   It's scum.  Is scum. And absolute scum that sucks cycles from YOUR machine to sell you crap.

it's a joke and a sham that you have to play for an OPENING BOOK for daily games ... that's why i used to prefer lichess but the quality of players on lichess is not comparable to the opponents on chess.com, so i caved

mtwain: I guess the summary sentence was correct since my opponent blundered it away. But I also made 1 blunder in the game, contrary to the quick analysis.

chungle: I looked through the settings and couldn't find it-- where can I turn it off?

However much i like chess.com, this has got to be one of their stupidest ideas and in my opinion completely useless and i f*cking hate it!

I only wish i could turn it off. Maybe we should start a petition to get rid of the feature all together!

Wonderful...now we will go from people asking: "Why was this called a mistake?"  to..."How come i didn't play any brilliant moves???"  More "Bells and whistles" that most wont understand or use correctly.

Dont ask questions...Now they will break "book moves" down into:

"book moves"

"sub book moves"

"alternate main line book moves"

"main line book moves"

"side line book moves"

And we will have even more chaos/stupid questions.

Well hen you might as well just throw in:

Innovation

Peculiar

Unknown

Who knew?

What the??

How about:

Boring

Lame

Then you have to be "all inclusive" and add: Exciting.

Ofcourse 

But how about that petition idea? I've heard enough people complaining about it... 

Dont forget "clear"