Average centipawn loss

I had no incurracies,blunders or mistakes then also my centipawn loss was 48.

What is the problem here or I have misunderstood average centipawn loss.

You can have a look at that game at lichess. Link to the game: https://lichess.org/fhvYi9SS/black

• Do yourself a favour and forget about centipawns! – David Sep 30 at 11:39

Average centipawn loss is the difference of your move to the best computer move averaged over all moves.

Inaccuracies/Mistakes/blunders as defined per lichess are moves that are at least 0.5=50 centipawns / 1=100 centipawns / 3=300 centipawns worse than the suggested computer move.

This rule is not strictly enforced in situations where you have a clear winning position and a choice of several good moves.

So if you have a choice between a move that leads to +10 advantage (best computer move) and +9 advantage this will count to your centipawn loss, but will not show up as mistake.

Even without it, it is possible to collect centipawn losses < 50 that don't show up as inaccuracy.

• Yes Now I understand,thanks – user57404 Sep 26 at 18:29
• I don't think this explanation is quite correct. Even if the player follows exactly the best moves according to engine, the evaluation curve will not be flat and there will be nonzero centipawn loss. The reason is that evaluation changes after a move has been committed (the engine can recurse deeper). – leftaroundabout Sep 27 at 12:17
• @leftaroundabout: I guess you'd have to read the source code to know for sure, but I would expect that the comparison is made with the computer evaluation at any particular move. Whether the evaluation changes after that should be irrelevant in that case. – user1583209 Sep 27 at 14:27

I think the issue is that, when one side is winning by a large margin, the analysis will not always indicate an inaccuracy for a move which is not best but still clearly winning.

For example, after 20.Qg4, the analysis says that 20...dxe3 would have a score of -18.9, but your played move 20...d3 has a score of -10.9. That's an 800 centipawn difference. The analysis does not show an inaccuracy here, but that's a lot of centipawns.