This is the definition given by Wikipedia: "Chess" is a two-player board game played on a "chess"board, a square-checkered board with 64 squares arranged in an eight-by-eight grid. It is one of the world's most popular games, played by millions of people worldwide at home, in clubs, online, by correspondence, and in tournaments.

Each player begins the game with sixteen pieces: one king, one queen, two rooks, two knights, two bishops, and eight pawns, each of these types of pieces moving differently. Pieces are used to attack and capture the opponent's pieces. The object of the game is to checkmate the opponent's king by placing it under threat of capture ("check") which cannot be avoided. In addition to checkmate, the game can be won by the voluntary resignation of one's opponent, which may occur when too much material is lost, or if checkmate appears unavoidable. A game may result in a draw in several ways, and neither player wins. The course of the game is divided in three phases. The beginning of the game is called the opening (with the development of pieces). The opening yields to the phase called the middlegame. The last phase is the endgame, generally characterised by the disappearance of queens.

In another thread I proposed that "chess" doesn't really exist, and it is just a human invention, because humans, differently from computer, play games. This is true especially for the noobs (those who can't play "chess" at all), and always differently from computers they don't really KNOW if what they evaluate strategically is sound or not. When a computer plays "chess", it is not considered "chess", because if a human's unicorn called "chess" exists then how come computers can beat them without using "chess"  ? Without mentioning that computers can see checkmates at 10-15 moves distance in less than 1 second.

I'm assuming there are many positions and games which support my thesis, and promise to use them next time I make a claim. Yes, I really promise for next time - Double pinky swear.

The hipster quotes were the most time-consuming part but the most rewarding.

chess exist,i dont see you playing for our team sd sir oinquark, chess exist when we join tournaments for me sir.

What's a hipster?

Chess  indeed does exist  but do those who play chess really exist ?? Hmmmmm

What's Substance D, Bob?

Does a thing need to qualify as a physical entity in order to be called a thing, or is an idea that exists only in the plane of abstracts also a thing?

Plato dealt with these ideas as being higher or lower levels of existence. The things (to Plato) that were more abstract and less space-occupying were considered purer forms of reality... but I digress.

Chess is the name of the game. The act of playing chess will vary depending on a number of factors, all relative to the existences of the people on earth, most specifically the chess players invovled in the game and also the materials provided for them by other humans and natural and industrial processes.

Wood pieces, plastic pieces? Wooden board, plastic board? Time of day? Words are just symbols for actual "beings", conditions, states of matter.

SO, I think you are getting hung up on the nature of the existence of the word "chess" versus the nature of the existences of all of the factors invovled in playing a game of chess.

Does chess.com exist?  Do you all exist?

Oh no, I'm stuck in an awful Inception dream.  Is this the short dream or the dream within a dream?  Somebody, put me in a Benji movie instead!

Wait, is your argument that chess doesn't exist because it's played differently by different players?

Also, your syntax is a bit confusing.  "This is true especially for the noobs (those who can't play "chess" at all), and always differently from computers they don't really KNOW if what they evaluate strategically is sound or not."

Always what differently from computers?

If your argument is that chess doesn't exist because it's always played differently, then by your logic, nothing exists, because everybody plays basketball differently, or writes essays differently, or reads books differently.

Your argument barely exists.

I still say Plato didn't exist.

So if he fell, would he make a sound?

there r 2 kinds of people those who r addicted 2 subsance D and those who haven't tried it

I'm still trying to get all them damn bugs outta my hair.

+1

What do you mean by "exist?"

The meer ? in itself gives it existance.

Actually, I mean "exest"...as in:  "Man, chess is the exiest!"

Yes, chess definitely does seem sexist