How in chess notation one decides what mark put on a move like if it’s a strong move (!), weak move (?) very strong move (!!) or very weak move (??) if the game is not ended yet? A move could appear weak but actually leads to a strong sequence
In: Other
Those markings only show up in unofficial analysis of chess games.
Actual chess notation just records the moves played, with no other information recorded.
In chess, while you can complete a game and look back over the moves played to see which move was crucial in leading you to victory, that doesn’t make the move objectively strong.
To an extent, chess is an objective game. There are good moves and bad moves, and everything in between.
It’s very possible that you could have played an awful move, but it was crucial in helping you win the game the exact way you did.
A bad chess move is one that opens up weaknesses that your opponent can exploit.
For example, you might move your queen to a position where your opponent can take it without any chance of you getting anything major in return.
That’s an objectively bad move, because your opponent can take your queen for free.
However, your opponent doesn’t HAVE to take your queen. Say they miss the free queen, instead making a move that doesn’t do much at all. Your queen is still vulnerable, but with your next move you checkmate your opponent with the queen.
You made a bad move by hanging your queen, but the move was also crucial in helping you win in the way you did. You got lucky that your opponent didn’t take advantage of your bad move.
I don’t know much about chess tournaments, so I can’t answer the actual question of how or why it’s done in practice, but from a mathematical perspective it seems to me that a move can be “good” or “bad” independently of the ultimate consequences of the move based on how it changes the possibility space. A move is good or bad based on how it restricts your opponent’s paths to victory relative to how much it restricts your own, compared to the other possible moves you could have made. So it doesn’t matter what your opponent ACTUALLY did in response, but rather how the move changes all the possible games that could proceed from that decision. For example, if a move creates opportunities a good opponent could exploit while opening up relatively few options for you, it’s still a bad move even if your opponent doesn’t actually notice the mistake.
weak moves can only lead to a strong sequence if the opponent doesnt respond to the first move properly.
suppose for a second that god existed and could play perfect chess, and that he is playing himself. and lets further suppose that the outcome of such a game is a draw (which it probably is).
there is no way that god could suddenly play a move that changes a drawn position into a winning one. the only way that could happen is if the preceding move was a mistake by the opponent.
therefore, logically, there is no such thing as an (!) or (!!) move – only (?) and (??).
now, we are of course not gods, and neither are the computer engines that play the game. but these computers are quite good at judging positions, based on best future moves by both sides. they do have to stop analysing at some point though and give a best guess of the evaluation of a given position. they do this by assigning values – eg +1.3 means white has an advantage of 1.3 pawns. or -99 would mean black can force a checkmate. something like that.
it is possible, and happens all the time, that a certain move shifts an evaluation significantly in the opponent’s favour. we may then assign (?) or (??) to this move, depending on the size of the shift.
on the other hand, it should not be possible to increase the evaluation in your favour by playing a certain move. that move should have been considered anyway, and would influence the evaluation of the current position. so, again, (!) and (!!) should not be possible.
as some have pointed out, it does happen that the computer evaluation shifts favourably having played a certain move. this is a reflection of the imperfections of the computer software and hardware. perhaps it was a move that the computer dismissed as bad too early in the analysis, but if forced to analyse it would eventually realise the strength of it. this is a candidate for a (!) or (!!) but it only reflects imperfections in the analysis tool used.
in short, chess is a game of mistake after mistake where the last but one to make a mistake usually wins (or salvages a draw). theoretically there are no good or very good moves, just bad and very bad ones.
I just want to add that technically you are not allowed to add these during competetive games. It counts as notes and you are not allowed to have/make any of those.
TIL that if someone ever annotates me playing chess that all of my moves will have a ?? after them.
As long I know, this are post-game notations, when you are analising a game you can mark like “questionable choise (?)”, like when giving up some pieces, making a non-forzated mistake or playing something really non-related to the current position (like when the best move is to castle or to do a easy-to-see trade, the player played pawn to a3)
The “!” and “!!” are when you do some hard-to-see plays, or finding the best choise in a difficult position in mid or late game. (following an opening isn’t “!” because they are very known, but finding a forced checkmate in 6 plays is a !!)
Been playing Chess for 35 years. I’ve never seen a blunder (??) ever turn out to be a good move. Each move can be annotated based on the position at that moment. Chess is mathematical and each move is calculated based on its probability of winning, losing or drawing. If you’re playing a weak move that leads to a better sequence then mathematically you have not made the best move to lead to that better sequence. For example; you made 3 moves by three different pieces and gave Checkmate, however you could’ve used two pieces and one less move to deliver a quicker mate. Chess is a game of tempos and the more precise move shaves tempo and helps deliver a quicker favorable game. Think of the “?” as there is a better move that could’ve been made.
Long ago when the Earth was young the military base where I worked installed a new Emergency Command Center. When it came time to try it out for the first time, I was tasked with being “Log Recorder.” The job consisted of taking notes of who did what when. I was chastised for using this type of chess notation in the margin of the logbook. Since I was a low level nobody the War Lords thought it inappropriate for me to comment on their actions.
Back when I played chess competitively, I would use the ‘?’ notation liberally during the game (on opponents’ moves) and try to let my opponent see. Power move.
I was 8-12 or so, not sure how effective this tactic was.
Latest Answers