How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?
I would recommend reading the wikipedia article on solving chess. tygxc makes a lot of assumptions that would not be accepted in a math proof, so its easier if you just get it from the experts instead of having myself try to repeat the step by step explanation.
@7815
"thats using an imperfect evaluator, and >99% is not 100%. thats how math works."
++ That is not an evaluator, the 7-men endgame table base is the perfect evaluator.
The game ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so the black moves need not be questioned. The white moves need to be questioned and alternatives explored, as there is a < 1% probability that some better white move is avaible.
you need to prove that the game ends in a 7 men table base draw
prove it
im still waiting for the proof that black doesnt win with perfect play.
@7803
"Checkers had a simplification algorithm/position"
++ Checkers used Chinook and an endgame table base.
Chess has Stockfish and a 7-men endgame table base.
"weak versus strong solving are, for our purposes, essentially identical"
++ No, not at all. Strong = all white moves, all black responses.
Weak = all reasonable white moves, only 1 black response.
"response to your math error" ++ I made no math error, the math is correct.
you do realize that by definition you cant prove to me that black doesnt win with perfect play on black's end? by definition to prove that would be a weak solution for chess, of which does not exist.
@7812
"you need to prove that the game ends in a 7 men table base draw"
++ Look at this game: https://www.iccf.com/game?id=1164344 it ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so none of black's moves need to be questioned.
Alternatives for the white moves need to be explored to weakly solve Chess.
++ Checkers used Chinook and an endgame table base.
Chess has Stockfish and a 7-men endgame table base.++ No, not at all. Strong = all white moves, all black responses.
Weak = all reasonable white moves, only 1 black response.
both of those are factually incorrect.
checkers had simplification in addition to chinook.
weak is not all reasonable moves, it is all moves.
also, it is most certainly a math error. I am willing to bet $10,000 on it.
@7827
"you cant prove to me that black doesnt win with perfect play on black's end?"
++ Of course we have evidence to that: millions of human and engine games especially ICCF WC Finals drawn games. White has the advantage of the initiative: 1 tempo, but not enough to win.
"by definition to prove that would be a weak solution for chess"
++ No, that is an ultra-weak solution only. a weak solution also shows how to draw.
@7812
"you need to prove that the game ends in a 7 men table base draw"
++ Look at this game: https://www.iccf.com/game?id=1164344 it ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so none of black's moves need to be questioned.
no, I propose that black should have been able to win that from the starting position. disagree? prove me wrong.
How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?
I would recommend reading the wikipedia article on solving chess. tygxc makes a lot of assumptions that would not be accepted in a math proof, so its easier if you just get it from the experts instead of having myself try to repeat the step by step explanation.
Anyone can write a Wikipedia article.
wikipedia articles get fact checked and peer reviewed more often than news organizations.
@7823
"I would recommend reading the wikipedia article on solving chess."
++ That is no good source. It even starts by misquoting its own reference.
"get it from the experts" ++ Prof. van den Herik is an expert. Wikipedia authors are not.
@7827
"you cant prove to me that black doesnt win with perfect play on black's end?"
++ Of course we have evidence to that: millions of human and engine games especially ICCF WC Finals drawn games. White has the advantage of the initiative: 1 tempo, but not enough to win.
"by definition to prove that would be a weak solution for chess"
++ No, that is an ultra-weak solution only. a weak solution also shows how to draw.
"Of course we have evidence to that: millions of human and engine games especially ICCF WC Finals drawn games. White has the advantage of the initiative: 1 tempo, but not enough to win."
it could be billions of games. they dont mean ANYTHING in terms of proof.
I propose that that Tempo is actually a disadvantage. disagree? prove me wrong.
@7833
"wikipedia articles get fact checked and peer reviewed"
++ No, not at all. They get edited by amateurs.
@7823
"I would recommend reading the wikipedia article on solving chess."
++ That is no good source. It even starts by misquoting its own reference.
"get it from the experts" ++ Prof. van den Herik is an expert. Wikipedia authors are not.
actually no the wiki article has peer reviewed sources, so its just as fine.
@7833
"wikipedia articles get fact checked and peer reviewed"
++ No, not at all. They get edited by amateurs.
that wikipedia is innaccurate and untrustworthy is actually a myth. are the sources to be checked and taken with a grain of salt? yes. but that doesnt make wikipedia incredibly reliable.
@7829
"checkers had simplification in addition to chinook. " ++ What simplification? Transition tables?
"weak is not all reasonable moves, it is all moves." ++ If the good white moves cannot win, then the bad white moves cannot win either. It is pointless to explore 1 e4 e5 2 Ba6?
"it is most certainly a math error" ++ No there is no math error.
Sqrt (10^37 * 10 / 10,000) = 10^17 relevant positions.
@7829
"weak is not all reasonable moves, it is all moves." ++ If the good white moves cannot win, then the bad white moves cannot win either. It is pointless to explore 1 e4 e5 2 Ba6
you just made another error.
you need to prove Ba6 is bad before you can discard it.
@7835
"I propose that that Tempo is actually a disadvantage."
++ It is easy to disprove that by strategy stealing.
If 1 e4 c5 were a black win, then 1 c3 e5 2 c4 would be a white win.
If 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 were a black win, then 1 Nf3 d5 2 g3 c5 3 d3 Nc6 4 d4 would be a white win.
For all possible black wins you can propose there is a corresponding white win.
@7815
"thats using an imperfect evaluator, and >99% is not 100%. thats how math works."
++ That is not an evaluator, the 7-men endgame table base is the perfect evaluator.
The game ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so the black moves need not be questioned. The white moves need to be questioned and alternatives explored, as there is a < 1% probability that some better white move is avaible.