Chess will never be solved, here's why

@4075
"If the starting point is when resources become available."
++ The engines exist that calculate a billion positions per second. They cost money to rent.

"Which is probably at least 200 years from now."
++ We do not know when somebody opens his wallet. It might as well be tomorrow.

"But even then my guess is it wont be solved"
++ If the engine exhausts the 100 million billion legal, sensible, reachable, relevant positions then chess is weakly solved, then it is proven just like Checkers or Losing Chess, no speculation. We will then know for sure how black can draw.

Your whole premise is speculation...of the worst kind.  Unsubstantiated and with a sole proponent.

You have no idea of the "resources" which DOES exist, and not to mention the possibility that is already solvED.

Also speculation, if you are talking to me.  I have an entire career in computers, databases, and systems design.  

Chess is not already solved, by the way.  It's not even 1% solved.

@4087
"It's not even 1% solved."
++ Yes, that is right. From ICCF WC Finals we have more than 1000 perfect games.
The weak solution of chess is expected to have a proof tree of about a billion positions, i.e. 10 million games. So chess is about 0.01% solved.

Congratulations: you are now a game theorist (for having observed they are very similar types of games: finite deterministic games of perfect information with 3 results).

Oh no! 🥴

@4089

"games that may or may not be perfect." ++ 1469 games, 1177 draws, 1104 perfect games
"a proof tree of about a billion positions, i.e. 10 million games"
++ Still not understood  by crazy people who don't understand anything at all and who still do not understand the difference between weakly solving and strongly solving.

@4087
Carlsen, Caruana, and Nepo and their teams of grandmasters and cloud engines have prepared their World Championship matches for months and have presumably already solved B33, C89, C42 that is 3 of the 500 ECO codes or 0.6%.

Prepping engines lines against other players is not solving anything, even if you let the engine run for months.  Everybody but you seems to grasp this.

The Planet Of New Orleans

I did not.

But now you mentioned it, assuming you work for NASA and the military on their top secret project,  I would like to know more about where they are about at the moment - I always thought they are ahead.

@tygxc, do you not understand what happens when an imperfect player evaluates a position?

Sometimes they are wrong. And I mean completely wrong - wrong enough to have the wrong belief about what the correct result is. This happens in every decisive game.

All available sources of opinions are imperfect and can be completely wrong. You are proclaiming that they never are, which is simply an error.  It's a good bet that on an individual position, a very strong player is correct in their evaluation. It is a good bet for several such positions. It becomes a pretty shaky bet for a lot of positions - you don't need that many before the probability that the player is wrong at least once is high. With enough positions, it becomes almost certain the player is wrong some time.

Pot calling the kettle?

You're the one that continues to assert the Syzygy tablebases strongly solve 7 man chess even after it's explained to you with examples why they don't.

@4108

"what happens when an imperfect player evaluates a position?"
++ Neither the player nor the engine evaluates the position,
the 7-men endgame table base evaluates the position and it is perfect.

"This happens in every decisive game." ++ Yes, every decisive game has some error.

"All available sources of opinions are imperfect and can be completely wrong."
++ Yes that is true, but some absolute statements are sure not to be wrong.
Certain endgames with opposite colored bishops are drawn.
1 a4 cannot be a better move than 1 e4 or 1 d4
1 e4 e5 2 Ba6 loses for white

"It's a good bet that on an individual position, a very strong player is correct in their evaluation."
++ I even calculated that probability.
If you let the 10^9 nodes/s cloud engine run for 17 s, or a desktop for 4.7 hours, then the absolutely correct move will be among the top 4 engine moves in all but 1 case in 10^20.

this forum is going till 5k posts which consists nothing but trash

Sorry you had a (probably involuntary) break in "screen time", but don't take it out on others...

Thats absurd comes out of the condition of the game or checkmate. If we dont accept the draw as a solution in chess. Some french champions deluded by their opening are trying to make legal the stalemate confito

trying to make legal the stalemate condition as a winning end. That resolvef all abdurds of chess engines mess.