I’ve not actually looked at the top three moves since becoming a supporter because I know they’re not much use in general. Now to be fair the first game I looked at it did pick the big score losses. However, for example this game
The moves it picks are 1-2 point losses, when the Black group actually just up and dies in the bottom left. I think that’s probably a key move, over those 1-2 point mistakes. More specifically move 71 is -9 points, move 73 is -3, there’s 4 and 7 point mistakes to follow, and then a -11 on move 79.
Now I can understand that it might not be completely useful for nonsupporters if it’s showing too many of the key moves, which are close together. Like maybe it’d be not so useful if move X was a big mistake and then move X+1 was equally big, and basically they just end up showing the same variation.
Maybe one could do something like this, or guarantee a Y move gap between mistakes of the same color. I’m hesitant about that though, since that might not be what people would want out of a game.
How many games do you want linked by the way @benjito ? As many as I can find where the top 3 moves maybe don’t match the biggest mistakes or?
On a separate but unrelated note, what would you think about adding a table/modal/popup type thing that one could click where it summarises the AI graph? Something like lichess and chess.com have?
It’s not necessarily the most useful, depending on what kind of categories we decide to group things into but it would certainly give people a nice overview to compare game to game.
Something like groupings according to katago – Excellent (bot moves with small score loss), Great (bot moves with larger score loss), Inaccuracy (small score loss <1,2 points?), Mistake (3-5 or 6 points?), Blunder (7+ point mistake).
I guess we don’t necessarily have a centipawn loss, but we could give an average point loss per move sort of thing, or something like that.