Timeline for What was the first brilliant move ever recorded?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10 at 20:45 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Sep 19 at 11:57 | comment | added | HTTYDTHW | Thanks for adding the link @SecretAgentMan | |
| Sep 19 at 11:56 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Sep 18 at 12:47 | comment | added | Ian Bush | Now the "definition" has been added the question is, IMO, impossible to answer - the "definition" is just not well enough, err, defined. Presumably chess.com sticks it through an engine and applies some algorithm to the numbers that come out. What is that algorithm? Once you have that download some of Greco's games and see if anything comes out as a first stab. | |
| Sep 17 at 21:46 | history | edited | SecretAgentMan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Adding definition based on comments
|
| Sep 17 at 20:26 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Sep 16 at 8:02 | comment | added | Evargalo | The definition of a brilliant move (quoting from chess.com since that's the reference chosen) should be edited into the body of the question. | |
| Sep 15 at 13:51 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I tried to clean up the question.
|
| Sep 14 at 2:20 | comment | added | Noam D. Elkies | @paulgarrett Alfil cannot promote and only has access to 8 of the 64 squares. Then again a pawn could only promote to a fers, and Wikipedia's Alfil article suggests that an alfil was still more valuable than a pawn. Since the OP has now specified modern chess I suppose its moot whether an alfil sacrifice would count as "brilliant". | |
| Sep 13 at 22:47 | comment | added | paul garrett | @NoamD.Elkies, do you say that an alfil is weaker than a pawn because it cannot promote? Can you clarify, please? | |
| Sep 13 at 21:10 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
shortened.
|
| Sep 12 at 23:01 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
cleared up the question
|
| Sep 12 at 22:59 | comment | added | HTTYDTHW | I mean all chess, not just chess.com, and with the modern set of chess rules. I'll edit the question. | |
| Sep 12 at 19:35 | comment | added | Noam D. Elkies | How far back are we allowed to go? Was it still "chess" before the en passant rule? Before 0-0 and 0-0-0 got their current meaning? All the way back to medieval chess with fers and alfil (in which case do they count as "pieces" even though an alfil is weaker than a pawn)? | |
| Sep 12 at 18:00 | comment | added | Ian Bush | Do you mean just games on chess.com, or all chess? | |
| Sep 12 at 15:54 | comment | added | SecretAgentMan | @bof Chess.com's definition of a brilliant move can be found here: Is there a way to get blunders, mistakes and inaccuracies using Stockfish? | |
| Sep 12 at 7:37 | comment | added | Evargalo | Are you asking for someone to dig in Chess.com records to find the first games played after they published their new definition ? | |
| Sep 12 at 4:21 | comment | added | bof | What is chess.com's definition of a brilliant move? | |
| Sep 12 at 1:52 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Sep 12 at 1:52 | comment | added | HTTYDTHW | I mean after they updated it. I'll edit the question. | |
| Sep 12 at 0:57 | comment | added | SecretAgentMan | Do you mean the original Chess.com definition or after they updated the definition (2nd version)? | |
| Sep 11 at 23:15 | history | edited | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
removed unnecessary text
|
| S Jun 19 at 13:27 | history | suggested | Jonah Hodge | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed grammar and capitalization.
|
| Jun 19 at 13:26 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 19 at 13:27 | |||||
| Jun 19 at 13:24 | history | asked | HTTYDTHW | CC BY-SA 4.0 |