Chess will never be solved, here's why

"1 e3 e5 2 e4"

im sorry.  i dont think you have reading comprehension.

"If 1 Nf3 Nf6 were a symmetrical position black win, then 2 Ng1 Ng8 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Ng1 Ng8 is a draw and hence not a symmetrical position black win."

ANNNND YOU FELL FOR THE TRAP I PREDICTED YOU WOULD FALL FOR.

@8308

"none of your arguments or claims appear on any chess media"
++ Many grandmasters have stated Chess is a draw: Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca, Fischer, Kasparov, Kramnik, Nakamura, Carlsen.

Sveshnikov has stated weakly solving Chess is possible in 5 years and he has outlined the method: good assistants and modern computers, from the opening to a technical endgame.

@8310

"a tempo is an advantage"
++ It is, but not enough to win.
White can afford to lose 2 tempi, black can only afford to lose 1 tempo.
In the initial position white has 19 moves that draw and 1 move that loses.
To each of those black has less than 19 moves that draw and more than 1 that loses.

none of them said that.  none of them said that it was proven that chess was a draw.

@tygxc please tell me what I explained how black would respond to e3.

i dont think u understand the context.

remember the chomp strategy stealing argument u saw?

tygxc is falsely trying to apply that to chess.

correct!

"If 1 Nf3 Nf6 were a symmetrical position black win, then 2 Ng1 Ng8 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Ng1 Ng8 is a draw and hence not a symmetrical position black win."

black doesnt have to do 2... Ng8. 

your strategy stealing claim is that white can lose a tempo into any relevant position.  i am demonstrating how that isnt the case.  I dont need to give the black response to force a win, i just need to give a black response to avoid gaining a tempo.

im not speaking in terms of sun is not made of eggs truth/proof, remember.  goldbach's conjecture holds for integers up to at least 10 ^18, but we dont know for sure whether it holds for all.

tygxc, you claim at some point, after N amount of moves, that white can lose a tempo.

during those same N amount of moves, black can also lose a tempo.

so theres a net change of zero.  

by the way, I noticed you made the mistake of mentioning moving a knight back and forth.  

thats 2 tempo.  not one.

oh yeah for sure. remember when i said stuff on conditional probability with regards to my opinion on chess's outcome? this is what I meant.

however, tygxc is claiming absolute proof of position, not sun is not made of eggs proof.

OK - they do work; they just give the wrong answers. I understand now.

11=0.007

Obvious really. Don't know why I didn't see it straightaway.

@8330

"they do work" ++ Yes, they do, and they give the right answers

"11=0.007" ++ No, I did not say that. I said:

• Chess is a draw
• Of the 10^44 legal positions 10^17 are relevant to weakly solving Chess.
• 3 cloud engines of 10^9 nodes/s jockeyed by humans can weakly solve Chess in 5 years
• ICCF WC Finals draws are > 99% certain to be perfect games with optimal play from both sides
• At 17 s on a 10^9 nodes/s engine the 4 top engine moves contain the table base exact move with 1 error in 10^20 positions

I have a question. Can your precious logic, which you all venerate so blindly, ever smell a flower - or LOVE?

DIDN'T. THINK SO.

“Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.” -V 🌹  

Chess is a complex game with billions of different moves thats why even Magnus isn t playing like a computer

Probably not, Wouldn't be relevant to the topic.

We do that sort of thing in our spare time.

Please take as long as you want.