If it marked it it as a blunder, it probably was. However, game review at lower depths can miss things that are found at higher depth. If you have a link to the game, that might help.
Though, my guess is that while you get a rook for a knight, the other knight will get stuck and captured relatively quickly, assuming there's not something else more active in the position for your opponent to take advantage of.
Yeah I had the bot tell me I blundered today even though the move was necessary to enable checkmate in 2. Granted, moving that piece put another at risk, but that was a sacrifice I knowingly made.
Its entirely possible the bot picked up on something neither my opponent nor I saw. I'm not a good player by any means. But it snagged me a checkmate near the beginning of the middle game and felt good because O had strategized the win several turns in advance. Seeing the bot call my 3rd to last move a blunder because it sacrificed a piece that served no other purpose in my plan felt wrong.
Yeah I had the bot tell me I blundered today even though the move was necessary to enable checkmate in 2. Granted, moving that piece put another at risk, but that was a sacrifice I knowingly made.
Its entirely possible the bot picked up on something neither my opponent nor I saw. I'm not a good player by any means. But it snagged me a checkmate near the beginning of the middle game and felt good because O had strategized the win several turns in advance. Seeing the bot call my 3rd to last move a blunder because it sacrificed a piece that served no other purpose in my plan felt wrong.
There must have been a way to take advantage of your move
Hi! I’m not yet a paying customer (one free review a day works fine for me at this time) but I must say, I have been impressed by the bot coach and game analysis so far.
I was just very surprised in my latest review (took pics to document it, if you’re interested). I’ll describe it, I think it’s reasonably easy to visualize for someone familiar enough with chess. Early in the game, one of my knights is in position to fork my opponent’s king and rook in their original positions, but the queen who’s also in her original position prevents it. Now my other knight, on the other side, can move forward, which would place it in diagonal view of my opponent’s queen (and unprotected). I did that, my bot opponent (intermediate…) took the bait with its queen, which allowed me to fork, my opponent then had no choice but to move his king, I took the rook, my knight was still comfy in the corner of the board — would take a while to threaten it and it’s very close to my opponent’s king. The opponent’s queen is now “out”, but that’s manageable and not bad for trading my knight for his rook. Knights are less useful in the late game, so from that point all I had to do was play very conservatively and force even trades and thanks to my advantage of one rook, I ended up with a decisive very-late-game advantage and won.
Now, in the review, the coach says it was a blunder to use the knight as queen bait, essentially saying I just lost it for no reason.
I thought the coach had a slightly longer term vision? By giving away that knight, I’m automatically taking a rook. Sounds good to me, but the coach calls it a blunder because I’m losing a knight for no reason (according to him).
I’m sharing this hoping it can be useful feedback for the coach’s programmers. Comments? Thanks in advance