# The Unified Chess Theory

Feb 21, 2013, 10:54 AM |
0

Most of you don't know me very well, but I am a person that looks at a chess piece and it's opportunities more than the strategy that is to be played. As an engineer to be, it was expected for me to analyze the game of chess in a more mathematically perspective. Before I do that, I want to give a background of myself and other games that I have participated and excelled at. I started my first game/hobby when I was 7. I studied the many ideas behind card games and tricks and even studied game theory through books found at the local library. These books opened up a world of possibilities about other games and so my journey began. At the age of 13 I played with my first Rubik's cube and I never let that cube out of my hands until I solved it. I refused to look up any solution because I wanted it to be all me. To this day, that satisfaction that came to me in the back left of my parents 1998 Sienna LE will never leave me. The fact that I solved it was not enough though. Not even close. I wrote down algorithms and evaluated ways that I could arrive at another step. I eventually brought my time down to 24 seconds after 3 months with the cube. At this time in my life, my parents never viewed my view on games as any importance to me other than a hobby. So they pushed me to become a more active kid that was involved in the school orchestra and sports. Yes, I became quite a runner and the California state champion in high school but my love was still based entirely on game theory and the brilliant formulas that revolve around us. The golden ratio is my ultimatum and motto, almost my bourn. Chess came to me when my friends pushed me to learn it and play it. Since then, I have read multiple books and studied my favorite player Fisher. All of this got me thinking though. When does it ever end? Just like my other "hobbies" came to a close when I solved them, chess was very much unlike them all. Chess held no solution like the others. Even the rubik's cube that has 43 quintillion possible combinations lacks that which chess still has, the lack of a solution. Is it possible for a perfect game? A perfect combination of moves (in a formulated pattern that is ) that no matter the opposition proves to be a win? The string theory of chess as I will call it now. I am at odds here with such proposal. A part of me wants to say no, but a part of me plays the devil's advocate and pushes forward for a solution. Almost as if such question parallels the fabled question of the meaning of life. I guess I just want to update this post for now as I contemplate such study. I will most undoubtedly fail at this, as many have tried before me, but the idea of such possibility excites me and it's worth a try!

Blogs