I never said a solved game could be played perfectly by everyone. I said in a game of no variance, like chess, **where there is a defined best move for any given board state, that game is solved**. That doesn't mean chess is easy or simple or anyone can master it.

Physical sports all have variance, which are the physical conditions the game is played in, as well as the training of the human performing the sport. A game with sufficient variance cannot be "solved" because there is not a fixed number of conditions that can be solved for. In chess, there is.

You have this backwards. You don't know the defined best move for any game state until the game is solved.

Physical "variance" is not likely to beat out 10^44 unique chess positions. For every possible way a human body can move, there are trillions upon trillions of chess positions for each one.

It doesn't matter if chess is not infinite, if the "fixed number of conditions" are so many that a storage array the size of galaxies cannot store them.

No, chess is not a sport. It's not even a game. It's a computation.

Chess is solved. A sport cannot be solved. A game can be solved but at that point it stops being a game and becomes a computation.

Why can't a sport be solved? Just because something is solvable doesn't mean everyone can do it. Maybe I'm not understanding your position very well.

In bowling, wouldn't "solving" it be a perfect score of 300? Wouldn't it be impossible to have a result better than that? Or a shooting sport, wouldn't solving it be a perfect bullseye? I would imagine solutions would only apply to some sports, but it seems possible at least.

I never said a solved game could be played perfectly by everyone. I said in a game of no variance, like chess, where there is a defined best move for any given board state, that game is solved. That doesn't mean chess is easy or simple or anyone can master it.

Physical sports all have variance, which are the physical conditions the game is played in, as well as the training of the human performing the sport. A game with sufficient variance cannot be "solved" because there is not a fixed number of conditions that can be solved for. In chess, there is.

How do you know there is a fixed number of conditions for solving chess? What if no number of conditions can solve it?

At least in bowling, and certain sports where perfection is possible, I would imagine even a slightly less than perfect performance could still result in a perfect score, or a "solution". A bowler who throws a fraction of a millimeter off of perfection would probably still get a strike. Probably the same with darts or other aiming/target sports.

I guess I'm just not understanding how perfection, or a solution, prevents something from being a sport. If a baseball pitcher has a problem (a batter trying to hit the ball) wouldn't the solution be to throw the ball so it's always a strike? It might be really hard, but I'll bet it's been done.