This shows how useless the game reviews are.

Well, Isabel was pretty much toast in that position. There was not much she could do.

The classication of "excellent" means that the move didn't reduce her winning chances by much.

https://support.chess.com/en/articles/8572705-how-are-moves-classified-what-is-a-blunder-or-brilliant-etc

So, the "excellent" evaluation means that her move didn't make your winning chances more than 2% better that they were before.

They should probably change the descriptive language terms so that people don't misunderstand the evaluations.

Are you guys reading the text? "Now White can't stop Black from winning a queen if they make the right moves."

White has mate in 3. White doesn't need to lose a queen, and black doesn't win a queen with the "correct" moves. I am not talking about the excellent evaluation, I am addressing the text in the bubble. It doesn't make any sense to me.

Technically with the best moves, white is losing a queen. It's just that by doing so they will be achieving checkmate.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the best move where white will lose a queen and achieve checkmate? And how is that better than what white did play?

Qc7+ Ka8

Qc8+ (saccing the queen), Bxc8

Rxc8#

The computer will say the queen sac and Qd8+ on the second move are equal, but checkmate=win

How is that the best move? Why is giving up material to checkmate better?

Why not 25. Qc7+ Ka8 26. Qd8+ Bc8 27. Qxc8# as played in the game?

I'm not saying it is better, just equal. You don't win more for winning with more material. The computer will prefer the sacrifice since it leaves less pieces on the board - quicker to verify mate.

If I were to coach someone or hire a coach, I wouldn't want them to advise this. Winning with more material when giving up material (sacrifices) won't give a better position should be advised. I know that sounds like Yoda talk, but why would we want to say what is in the bubble instead of "Queen can now deliver mate in 3 or a combination with the rook."?

In the game I played this morning, I had several forced checkmates at the end, one of which involved sacrificing a rook. The second-to-last move by my opponent in this variation received the comment, "This wins a rook."

I didn't actually have to sac the rook because the game didn't go down that road, but still. It's kind of ridiculous that they feel as though have to come up with something interesting to say about a move when checkmate is unavoidable.

You're not kidding, in my last game coach insisted on sacrificing my queen for no reason I could see, twice!