If all the pieces are traded and each player is left with a king, the game is over and is a draw.
Although nobody knows what is the best move in any given position and what might be a mistake, the consensus among strong chess players is that it's possible to reach such a drawn game without either player making a mistake.
Most of games I play don't have any mistakes (true masterpieces
) but they end nevertheless - sometimes under 20 moves... only because of my tactical brilliance! HAH! So yeah it's possible check out my games
.
So, then, obviously, a game played perfectly by both players ends in a draw, and therefore, there is no advantage to being white? My gut is that white should always win in a game played perfectly by both players....???
None of mine seem to end without some mistake or blunder of some kind. Usually they are decided by who makes the last or fatal blunder, but theoretically I suppose a game can be drawn without any mistakes or blunders. I don't know whether a game can be lost without a mistake or blunder, but that seems to be the more accurate question.
So, then, obviously, a game played perfectly by both players ends in a draw, and therefore, there is no advantage to being white? My gut is that white should always win in a game played perfectly by both players....???
Except for today, It's April 1st, Black goes first.
What exactly is a "mistake"? If you mean any less-than-optimal move, then we won't know if a mistake has been made.
Remember, a blunder is a blunder only if your opponent sees it!
Dear echecs - when you reach my level you don't have to worry how other ppl perceive you. Away with false modesty!
...and on a more serious note: I think there are games played by grandmasters where no serious mistakes were made still one side loses. Akiba Rubinstein (solid positional maneouvering) comes to mind - no great fireworks just gaining advantage little by little.
Isn't a positional mistake still a mistake? It just isn't a one-move blunder.
But couldn't it be postulated that by allowing your opponent to gradualy gain advantage, that is in and of itself a "mistake"?
By definition, neither player making a mistake would be "perfect play" -- this question is at the heart of, indeed is equivalent to, the question of solving chess.
Most, including myself, believe that with perfect play chess is a draw, but it is unlikely that we will know within our lifetimes if ever.
When you study some of his (Rubinstein) games you (and grandmasters who analyzed this games) can't see any mistakes - he was a master of positional play and sometimes he lead his opponents to endgame where most would agree draw without hesitation but he was able to outplay them somehow.
I'll try to find and post here a good example one of his games.
I'm sure there are other grandmasters who played in similiar style.
I don't know how to use pgn files in 'game editor' (when I paste pgn file in the field it opens a txt window but I can't continue - maybe I'm doing something wrong). Anyway here are two links:
1.http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1012722 - selected games of Rubinstein.
2.http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1119723 - his game against Carl Schlechter (Schlechter didn't make any mistakes apart from two inaccuracies in the opening still lost after 59 moves)
sure a game can end without someone making a mistake 1.e4 black is feeling generous and resigns 1-0 ...game over :D
he was able to outplay them.
Maybe I don't know what "outplay" means, but if one side plays better than the other, the losing side cannot have been playing optimally and therefore made some mistake.
sure a game can end without someone making a mistake 1.e4 black is feeling generous and resigns 1-0 ...game over :D
The resignation itself is a mistake.
How about:
1. Offer Draw
1... Accept Draw
Even 1. e4 is a mistake! White moves his pawn from e2 where it was guarded by 4 (!) pieces to the weak e4 square where it is completely undefended. Not to mention white opens up the vulnerable diagonal leading to his queen and reduces his influence on the squares d3, d4, f3, and f4 since the e-pawn can no longer attack them.
Yuck! What an ugly move!!
Even 1. e4 is a mistake! White moves his pawn from e2 where it was guarded by 4 (!) pieces to the weak e4 square where it is completely undefended. Not to mention white opens up the vulnerable diagonal leading to his queen and reduces his influence on the squares d3, d4, f3, and f4 since the e-pawn can no longer attack them.
Yuck! What an ugly move!!
LOL
My friend asserts that chess will go one forever if a blunder isn't made at some point by one of the sides.