what makes a move brilliant?

@fallboss007 said in #4:

Moves that draw in a losing position can be brillant
Only if it’s stalemate

#40
"a brilliant move is not enough to make it a brilliant game"

• Show one of the 50 brilliant games that contains no brilliant move according to the 4 criteria.

"if you play silly moves" * then you do not get a winning position, hence no brilliant move.

"if they make silly mistakes, nobody cares for your greatness" * You cannot reach a winning move unless your opponent makes a mistake..

"you can simply play "good moves" that people deem worthy, and the game may win a brilliancy prize" * Please show an example of a brilliant game according to the book of 50 without a brilliant move according to the 4 criteria.

"brilliant and bad at the same time" * No. Only good moves are brilliant.

"rigid Hübner framework" * It ii not only rigid, but solid and sound.

@SilentRookgm said in #41:

Only if it’s stalemate
Not only, that can be a losing postiion to a drawish endgame, 3 move repetition or 50 move rule

Are there brillant moves in à Lot of our games? (That we can miss or not)

"Are there brillant moves in à Lot of our games?"

• No, it is very rare to meet all 4 criteria.

is two great move is equal to brilliant move

#46
"two great move is equal to brilliant move"

• No. two pieces of glass make no brilliant.

It would seem that Masters tend to make brilliant moves with the Queen's Gambit Declined and the Ruy Lopez.
Maybe by looking at these opening games we might discover a way to make an algorithm that will point out a brilliant move.

A brilliant move is what when the opponent player move one piece and we did better move than that
Am i correct or not

@tpr said in #42:

#40
"a brilliant move is not enough to make it a brilliant game"

• Show one of the 50 brilliant games that contains no brilliant move according to the 4 criteria.

No. I am not your servant. If you want to keep trolling, I am afraid you have to do the work for yourself.

"if they make silly mistakes, nobody cares for your greatness" * You cannot reach a winning move unless your opponent makes a mistake..

Again mixing up theoretic evaluations and practical play. Not playing along this time.

"you can simply play "good moves" that people deem worthy, and the game may win a brilliancy prize" * Please show an example of a brilliant game according to the book of 50 without a brilliant move according to the 4 criteria.

Again, not doing your work, sorry.

"brilliant and bad at the same time" * No. Only good moves are brilliant.

I seriously doubt that all "Reinfeld-brilliant moves in 1961" would stand the test of time. And for "good" there several different metrics available. Computer evaluations are one, but "Practical winning chances" another factor - taking into account the opponent and game / match / clock situation.

"rigid Hübner framework" * It ii not only rigid, but solid and sound.

Yes, and nobody uses it. I really wonder if you ever played OTB chess seriously and read (somewhat modern) books at all.

@Toscani said in #48:

It would seem that Masters tend to make brilliant moves with the Queen's Gambit Declined and the Ruy Lopez.

And they mostly wear either dark socks or a hoodie when playing good moves.

I really wonder how absurd this discussion can get.