It occurred to me that presumably every chess engine's score is based on the best available continuation move, and thus every other move must be worse (or at least no better).
i.e. if there were a move that the engine could immediately assess as being higher-scored than the computer's chosen move, then that would in fact be the engine's chosen move, and thus would be reflected in the engine's score of this position.
If all that is true, then I conclude that (in terms of position scores) Human Games consist of each side making moves which always either maintain or lower their score. i.e you only increase your score on your opponents turn, when they make sub-optimal moves.
i.e. from a computer's p.o.v. a human chess game is contest of two players making moves to see who can lose positional points the least.
Is this roughly accurate?
In particular, this:
you only increase your score on your opponents turn, when they make sub-optimal moves.