Hello
I'm surprised that this move was not listed as blunder
My opponent give me his queen and eval pass from -7 to -30 !
Why analyse don't tag this move as blunder ?
any idea ?
thanks
Or white was just dead lost and giving up the queen really didn't make an impact.
The program viewed the probability that Black would win as high enough to stop marking blunders.
See:
How the game analysis works:
lichess.org/blog/WFvLpiQAACMA8e9D/learn-from-your-mistakesWell, White is already completely losing and I guess Stockfish just didn’t want to make your opponent cry.
On the plus side, I do like your opponent's name.
#4 not stockfish, lichess. stockfish does not have any intent. Also, lichess oversees the post-game annotation based on stockfish, but not only, see link from #3 (there is a formula, with some constants, all of which i am not sure to understand the provenance).
converting stockfish sub-games into end-game probabilities that is a feat. There are human choices in there. I find it funny that stockfish needs to be translated that way, while the leelas have to translate probabilities into centipawns evals....
