19058 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I would like to ask a question related to chess solving (and ofc. related to humanoid robots with passion for chess).
Let's imagine I have a robot friend named Borislav that has solved the chess and knows all the perfect moves. Let's say I bet Borislav for $20 that he can't mate me in X moves (the X stands for variable). Even though I'm terrible at chess I am able to prepare one specific tree of responses to my opponent's moves. Now what number should X stand for if I want to be 100% sure that I won't lose my precious $20? What is the longest known line that doesn't allow my opponent to checkmate me even if he plays the perfect game?Thanks for your replies!
There's no "forced" opening sequence that you can use to survive. Your opponent, even if playing perfect chess, has numerous equally viable options to choose from. So you'd have to have perfect memory recall of hundreds of thousands of opening lines in order to safely assume you'll reach X number of moves if X is say greater than 12. Now with experience and skill, you can apply fundamental concepts to last quite some time even against a powerful engine like Houdini before being checkmated.
I will say that you can safely avoid losing in the first couple moves if you studied the Fool's Mate though. ;)
Well, the Caro-Kann classical variation is a pretty long line with few options to deviate. But then again, your opponent isn't forced to play 3. Nc3 entering that line and could just play e5, putting you in completely different terrain.
The question presumes that chess has been "solved" which hasn't happened yet. Therefore I believe the question has no logically correct answer. What you could ask is "which opening as white/black has best record against a certain opening as black/white?".
Not to mention the advance variation is lately considered to be white's best try at theoretically refuting the Caro-Kann (though even here black can draw in the right lines).
Also, this assumes white will play e4. Since there are plenty of stagnant variations like the Petroff, e4 has no more claim to being better than d4, c4, g3, etc. So you still have to have an entire repertoire to be prepared for everything. Hence, there's no specific answer on how long a beginner could ensure they would last against perfect play. It's a gamble that has odds increasing with each higher number for X.
There's also the chance that he could play a bad move on purpose just to throw you off.
Thank you for your replies
How about aproaching this issue through computers? I know that computers solved chess for 6 and less pieces. Is there any info on the internet for how many moves was chess solved? Or is this a waste of time because of so many possibilities?
I know Borislav well. He's not that sneaky. Although he once licked my f-pawn with his robot tongue, so I wouldn't play king's gambit.
It's a waste of time. Checkers is solved but the solutions are so numerous that no one cares to know them.
Any game is a ''known line'' and any sequence may have holes, even in the opening. It's not unreasonable to assume for now with best play the game should be a draw, so I wonder if this is even a relevant question. You didn't mention who was even playing white.
Some opening lines can certainly go 30+ moves, but you don't know if they are bullet proof or if you will even get that on the board. So one of the problems is you don't really know what will happen in advance.
+1 on Firebrand's posts and Dutchday. They explain why the question according to todays knowledge only has speculative answers.
I'm sorry to inform you that I've just lost my $20 to my humanoid-solved-chess-robot-friend. Thanks for your thoughts anyway.
I would bet I could last at least 40 moves; if my objective is to last the longest possible, no to reasonably try to win. But, I am looking forward meeting Borislav.
This is a great question from mathematical point of view! I will think over it and will also discuss with other mathematicians!!
You don't understand enough mathematics!
I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to reach a position against a computer by using anti-computer tactics such as entirely closing the position in which you can both just shuffle back and forth indefinitely. Either that, or reach a forced draw in which either side has a perpetual.
Let's assume that Borislav has generated the entire search-space (every possible position from starting), and evaluated the value of every possible leaf node (i.e., the very bottom of the tree) as a value of infinity (white won) or -infinity (black won) or 0 (draw). Let's also assume that he calculates the value of non-leaf nodes using the standard minimax algorithm.
If Borislav had truly solved chess, then Borislav would have been able to propagate the value of the non-leaf nodes all the way back to the root of the tree (the starting position)
The answer really depends on the value of this node. Since all leaf nodes are either 'infinity', '-infinity' or 0 (draw), then the value of the root node has to be one of those.
If the value of the root node is 0 (i.e., white cannot force a mate, and neither can black), then X is unlimited.
If the value of the root node is infinity (i.e., white can always force a mate), then the answer is: the number of steps along the shortest line between root node and a leaf node where all values are infinity (divided by two, because the tree assumes that each of black's and white's are 2 separate moves, whereas chess assumes that a "move" is a move by each player). Given that some openings have been worked out to over 30 (chess) moves, I would assume that the value of X is at least 40. The value of X is directly dependent on us solving chess and traversing that all-infinity path. Until we do, we can only slowly increment our current value of X as we play more and more games.
I can't imagine the value of the root node being -infinity.
That being said, the answer here implies that both Borislav and yourself are playing perfectly, not just Borislav. If you're "terrible at chess" (i.e., you're help-mating Borislav), then the value of X is 2 (if Borislav is Black) or 3 (if Borislav is white), using the Fool's mate.
But Borislav is not a computer, he's a genius. Follow the thread, please.
Okay, I'll bite. You're an idiot. Your move.
But THE Borislav is most certainly a computer.
Bishops vs Knights
by richrf a few minutes ago
A lesson from psychology
by TrumanB a few minutes ago
who would be best chess player in lord of the rings and why?
by ImGr08 2 minutes ago
2/28/2015 - Maister - Grozdov, corr. 1954
by TrumanB 8 minutes ago
losing on time
by kaynight 10 minutes ago
Unsound Openings, Testing Chaos Theory
by XPLAYERJX 19 minutes ago
could chess be a indicator of mental disease like alzheimers?
by Shi_Tou 20 minutes ago
one word to describe chess.com crowd
by kaynight 20 minutes ago
by patzermike 28 minutes ago
Michael Richards (Kramer) On Chess
by FirebrandX 28 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!