As a strong chess player (around 2000 blitz on chess.com) I find it very surprising that time was not the most important factor. I know from experience when you

As a strong chess player (around 2000 blitz on chess.com) I find it very surprising that time was not the most important factor. I know from experience when you get to under 1 second per move remaining the probability of blundering goes way up. In regards to the skill-anomalous positions, I'd have to look at the positions to be sure but my guess is that these are end game positions where the most reliable path to victory is not the quickest path to victory. In a winning position an experienced chess player will try to simplify and win reliably over winning quickly. The model might consider this a blunder because it gives up some material advantage, but it doesn't actually change the end result of the game. My guess is that given these positions where a lower skilled player allegedly does better, in reality the better players win a higher percentage of the time.