chess.com analysis is so stupid even amateurs would laugh at it

Proofs that chess.com analysis is stupid:

1. Marking many weak or ordinary moves as brilliant moves

2. Giving many players' games with many mistakes high accuracies

3. Considering best moves better than excellent moves while in fact not all best moves are
excellent because forced mate moves are also considered best moves, but not excellent

4. Marking bad openings as book moves, including the joke opening and silly suicidal gambits

5. Bots' ratings are overestimated. Maximum who is 3200 rated is still equal to top Grandmasters' strength. just give any top GM 2 hours to think and a comfy place to sit and play, and don't be noisy and don't ask him for a chat. in his good day, he would play equally strong, if not better.

The list goes on...

in addition, chess.com algorithm is also stupid. so are the people who are overly too far to trust chess.com's standard of prejudge. i hate them all.

actually my friend is a grandmaster he is having chess.com

he says that all analysis are correct with perfect with good explanations .

Do other players get notified when you analyze their game? Just curious

My critical note... sometimes puzzles on chess.com are not quite correct.

They are sometimes ambivalent.

)

Because sometimes there two good moves... you choose one of them but chess.com says that the solution of the puzzle is another good move.

Really time to time it happens.

Do you meet with that problem also... or you don't?

chess.com's computer analysis isn't stupid. it's acctually correct

Not really. There are at least two factors why it's not:

1. The chess.com engine is laughably weak. Try to analyze with a real engine, and you'll see. It's like a 1960's chess computer, you make a move, the analysis goes one half-move deeper and the eval changes drastically. Very funny.

2. The so-called "full analysis" is a bad joke, some semi-coherent remarks made by a bad AI.

You can still use the chess.com engine to check tactical lines (even bad engines are good at tactics). But anything it says about accuracy, 'brilliant" moves etc is practically worthless.

I've done thousands of these puzzles and not seen this problem; the player's solution move is always the best move (at least "best" in the sense of the supplied engine, which is actually the subject of this thread).  The "opponent" may not play best moves, even blunder repeatedly, but you the player must still play best moves at each step.  This debate goes on in the puzzle comments, for example people arguing that a mate in 3 solution is just as good as a mate in 2 solution, but the puzzle app will only credit the fewest-moves-to-mate solution.  Though I do not get offered the more difficult puzzles, which may have a few bugs, I don't know.

It also underestimates and gives inaccurate scores when one is playing a system calls move inaccuracies when they are not.  All of a sudden game is even or negative and then like magic the assessment changes in one move and its not a blunder from either side.

Yur[nclez  is absolutely correct.

A few more reasons chess.com continues to spiral down the drain.  How much time, money, energy, and resources was wasted on all this "brilliant" move crap? 

None of these labels does anything to improve your play.  All it is, is an ego boost, and causes hundreds of posts asking the same question over and over: "Why wasnt my move brilliant?"  Again, nothing that improves your play.

Actually I think that this is quite a trivial feature, they probably just check if a certain calculation depth is needed to find the move.

But many resources were wasted discussing that feature.

"wasted"?

But what if you could market it?

Upgrade (pay) to get an improved version!

Now that's a brilliant move!

People pay good money to be called brilliant by a random algorithm!

@sred

Can you share a diamond version of a game report with the moves categorized?

whatever

Is is your photo on avatar ? Wow... )