fr, I got 4 on the 11th
Brilliant moves aren't all that brilliant
Sort:
tasty_gummy_bear wrote:
I am rated 600, I have never gotten a brilliant move in my whole life, even sacrificing a bishop for a passed pawn. I have never found a chance to sacrifice a queen for back-rank mate. Chess.com defined my sacrificing a bishop for a passed pawn as a blunder.
if the engine says so, then it is. Just keep playing and you'll eventually get it
May 28, 2025
0
#105
This was a trap for the Sicilian defense and a lot of players fell for it. It is made with a brilliant move where the bishop was sacrifised! A stunning move! that's because the king is _____ to take and We win the queen
16 days ago
0
#107
I think some moves are Brilliant because of the way they follow up to put the person in a winning position, but if it was just a random move with no follow up, then it can not be deemed a Brilliant move.
Sacrifice The Bishop And The Pawn.
Thats so fake how did you do that
13 days ago
0
#112
dannipop wrote:
I think some moves are Brilliant because of the way they follow up to put the person in a winning position, but if it was just a random move with no follow up, then it can not be deemed a Brilliant move.
Yeah, this is right. A sacrifice without a follow-up is just a blunder because you lose the piece.
Also, if the follow-up is missed, I don't think the move is brilliant anymore because you missed the follow-up that makes it brilliant.
13 days ago
0
#113
Thordelvalle wrote:
Sacrifice The Bishop And The Pawn.
??????????????? dude e4 is not brilliant
12 days ago
0
#114
Woofsalot2 wrote:
I have only seen maybe 1 or 2 brilliant moves out of a few thousand games, but i dont analyze that often. It seems to me they could become a little more common. Id also like it to not be limited to ONLY be for sacrafices.
brilliancies are meant to be uncommon. but yeah, positional brilliances - as in moving a piece to a square where it seems VERY bad but is actually the ONLY move in the position to keep the draw or win, etc - would also be nice. those brilliancies may exist, and if they do, positional brilliancies are extremely rare. the odds are very low, but, this entire brilliancies conversation is very compelling and thought-provoking. now it makes me question what a brilliancy even is haha
I Can Not Do A Book Move So E4 Is Brilliant.
8 days ago
0
#117
MasterMatthew52 wrote:
dannipop wrote:
I think some moves are Brilliant because of the way they follow up to put the person in a winning position, but if it was just a random move with no follow up, then it can not be deemed a Brilliant move.
Yeah, this is right. A sacrifice without a follow-up is just a blunder because you lose the piece.
Also, if the follow-up is missed, I don't think the move is brilliant anymore because you missed the follow-up that makes it brilliant.
8 days ago
0
#118
In this game, I played a trap for the Fried Liver. I was Black. Nxh3 for Black was a brilliant move because of a fork on the King and the rook. However, when I took the E4 pawn with my Knight , it was a mistake but I think it was also very good. Agree/Disagree?
I am rated 600, I have never gotten a brilliant move in my whole life, even sacrificing a bishop for a passed pawn. I have never found a chance to sacrifice a queen for back-rank mate. Chess.com defined my sacrificing a bishop for a passed pawn as a blunder.