How about this: A brilliant move is one that begins a line where for at least 5 plies afterward, your evaluation is at least 2 pawns worse than it started, and after that, your evaluation increases to at least 3 pawns above where it started. (All these numbers are arbitrary and subject to tweaking.)
The spirit of this definition is that a brilliant move is one that appears to worsen your position until, after some number of good moves from both sides, it becomes clear that you are doing better.
Recaptures and only-moves do not fit this definition. Neither do trivial sacrifices or two-move tactics unless you set the minimum depth too low.
Your opponent blundering does not trigger this definition either--it's not about what your opponent actually plays; it's about the engine lines. (The same logic here applies to current detection of blunders, too. A blunder is a blunder according to the engine, regardless of whether your opponent actually notices it in the game. The same would apply to brilliant moves.)
@thibault said in #2:
> What is a brilliant move?
You got a stream of piss for every candle, don’t you?
:)
I consider 1. ..... a6 that Tony Miles played against Anatoly Karpov as A Brilliant Move
@The7Master said in #34:
> Join my team
lichess.org/team/kings-association-of-friends Please do not advertise in forums unless it is the off-topic forum.
While I have to agree that brilliancy is somewhat of a human concept involving aesthetic judgement, I'm very surprised noone yet suggested this definition of a brilliant move:
1. It is the best move in the position.
2. It is very HARD TO FIND (i.e. unusual, quite moves, sacrifices which are no candidate moves, ...)
While I think that it is not necessary to define "hard to find" just to implement such a low-impact feature, I guess that the analysis of how hard a move is to find for humans might be very useful for cheat detection.
If the move is hard to find that only increases the chances that people playing the move won't have seen its brilliance.
Consequently we'll get dozens of posts a day from people curious why their move was labeled brilliant.
Noticing that someone plays the first move in a mate in 18 is useless for cheat detection. Someone can do that their first day playing chess. They can sacrifice their queen, have it taken, and resign. Wouldn't calling their move brilliant after they resign be strange?
thibault send so many topic......
great
@White-is-Overpowered and
@LeonardoBR have made the most practical (and implementable) definitions. A move that's evaluated as bad at a lower level of depth by the engine and best at a much higher level of depth. The difference between its evaluation at these two depth levels is the essential threshhold to evaluate and must be large enough to rule out the fluctuations that are in the noise.
I've seen it happen a few times during high level tournaments that a super GM who is maybe even or slightly disadvantaged in the position according to the engine makes a different move than the engine suggests is best (or even among the top moves) and everyone is surprised and can't understand it, but after the engine evaluates the best continuation it discovers at a high level of depth that the GM was right after all, and now has a significant advantage. That's how I imagine a brilliant move.
What is the inverse of a blunder?
If a blunder is like a hanging piece, then the inverse is a brilliant piece that is well protected and has gained value beyond it's initial starting value. Like a pawn would be worth more because it is now possible for it to promote to a greater value than one. Or another piece doubles the gain with a sacrifice. A brilliant move could also be when the advantage is on one side and by playing a move the advantage flips to the other player. A player that builds a fortress has built something brilliantly.
To determine it's brilliant value, you solve it with algebra.
What ever you do to one side of the equation, you do to the other side.
If White promoted to a Queen, then it is 9-1=plus 8 in value for white.
Black gets the inverse which is minus 8.
It's brilliant to double an advantage or to flip the graphical analystic advantage around.
Black was winning, now white is winning. What a brilliant move that was !!
