That's not great because there are better moves.
How is this not a great move?
Sort:
jackityjackjack wrote:
That's not great because there are better moves.
True…
jackityjackjack wrote:
That's not great because there are better moves.
That is not a valid argument in the slightest...smh
If you were to go by that logic, you could say that Magnus Carlsen is not a good chess player because he's not the world champion. See how stupid that sounds? 🤷🏻♂️
Fr3nchToastCrunch wrote:
jackityjackjack wrote:
That's not great because there are better moves.
That is not a valid argument in the slightest...smh
If you were to go by that logic, you could say that Magnus Carlsen is not a good chess player because he's not the world champion. See how stupid that sounds? 🤷🏻♂️
That’s what I’m saying, it isn’t the best move, but it still wins a queen.
Yep, but a great move most also be best.
Fr3nchToastCrunch wrote:
jackityjackjack wrote:
That's not great because there are better moves.
That is not a valid argument in the slightest...smh
If you were to go by that logic, you could say that Magnus Carlsen is not a good chess player because he's not the world champion. See how stupid that sounds? 🤷🏻♂️
I'm didn't say this wasn't a good move, I said it wasn't a Great! move. It's good in my book, and innacuracy in the engine's.
Stockfish says I missed mate-in-9 but still, I WIN A QUEEN. How is this not a great move…