"Best" is literally "Best" by definition, but yes the "simple" moves can be better in practical play if you understand the "simple" moves and not the objective "best" moves. Ideally, play what you know and analyze afterwards to try to understand the position better and why the computer "best" move is recommended over your game move.
Simplicity is key!
Sort:
Oldest
Oct 9, 2023
0
#3
Well, sometimes, I find after analyzing my games that the best move could never occur to me because well we are all humans. So its just better to find a good move instead of the best, so that the game becomes interesting and not one-sided. Playing better chess doesn't always mean to find the absolute best moves. A decade ago we thought stockfish was king but now look at Alphazero crushing every single engine. Its all about how deep one analyzes the game! But at that point it becomes boring tbh!
Criter engine thats a holy engine I think it is so!! It plays simple one move ahead and shows the danger face ""crye derrin"" or the stockfish market
Oct 9, 2023
0
#6
rohan_asif wrote:
Well, sometimes, I find after analyzing my games that the best move could never occur to me because well we are all humans. So its just better to find a good move instead of the best...
No. This is limiting yourself.
You are missing learning opportunities. If something is evaluated as better than your move, then try to understand this; that is a point of potential learning. I'm not saying to blindly agree with computers, but they are correct a lot of the time and it doesn't matter much if you are using a 3500 Stockfish version or a 3800 AlphaZero (or whatever other bots and ratings which are crazy high) because all of them are way higher rated than we humans and we can learn something from the way they play.
If you still can't figure out why some move is better (even after lots of analysis and trying to figure it out), then I recommend creating a quality chess.com forum thread and hopefully this will lead you to a human explanation from someone who can figure it out 
Oct 9, 2023
0
#9
KeSetoKaiba wrote:
rohan_asif wrote:
Well, sometimes, I find after analyzing my games that the best move could never occur to me because well we are all humans. So its just better to find a good move instead of the best...
No. This is limiting yourself.
You are missing learning opportunities. If something is evaluated as better than your move, then try to understand this; that is a point of potential learning. I'm not saying to blindly agree with computers, but they are correct a lot of the time and it doesn't matter much if you are using a 3500 Stockfish version or a 3800 AlphaZero (or whatever other bots and ratings which are crazy high) because all of them are way higher rated than we humans and we can learn something from the way they play.
If you still can't figure out why some move is better (even after lots of analysis and trying to figure it out), then I recommend creating a quality chess.com forum thread and hopefully this will lead you to a human explanation from someone who can figure it out
well you're correct in some sense.. but I would still prefer to play like a human would ... you know intuition is much more exciting than just playing the best move!
Chess is not about best moves, it is about avoiding bad moves.
In chess, I have played so many weird positions, but seriously believe that the best games are the ones with simple moves, not the best moves.