one brilint move or 99% accuracy.

I always wonder what you would choose: 1 brilliant move in one game or having 99% accuracy.

Surely you're joking, Mrs. Mona Lisa.

im not joking. AND IM BOY

I wouldn't even care, I would just care about winning

well with one brilliant move you might lose (considering that there are supernatural powers looking at your game), but with 99 percent accuracy you can hardly lose (unless you play against stockfish or Magnus or something like that). but people will start to say that you are cheating. so I dunno, maybe brilliant move.

I wish I have a 99% accuracy but the last one was lost due to a brilliant move.

@MoNALIsa1235555 said in #1:

I always wonder what you would choose: 1 brilliant move in one game or having 99% accuracy.

Accuracy of 99%, of course. Nothing in the game depends on one brilliant move. It is useless if the other moves are bad. And accuracy of 99% in the vast majority of cases is generally enough for victory (and in my games, and in the games of others, in which I looked at statistics).

@guchenan said in #5:

well with one brilliant move you might lose (considering that there are supernatural powers looking at your game), but with 99 percent accuracy you can hardly lose (unless you play against stockfish or Magnus or something like that). but people will start to say that you are cheating. so I dunno, maybe brilliant move.

With an accuracy of 99% (and higher), a strong chess player (for example, at the level of a candidate for master of sports in chess) not only can, but must play periodically. It is unlikely that there is a single player at this level who has not played games with such accuracy. But if a player makes a bunch of such games in a series (for example, in a series of 20 games he makes 7 such games) - this is very, very suspicious (most likely, such a player cheated).

@MoNALIsa1235555 said in #1:

I always wonder what you would choose: 1 brilliant move in one game or having 99% accuracy.

I got both

'an exclamation mark can only serve to indicate the personal excitement of the commentator' - Hübner