@6488
Let us go back to your own previous post @6445:
"Alpha–beta pruning is a search algorithm that seeks to decrease the number of nodes
that are evaluated by the minimax algorithm in its search tree."
"It stops evaluating a move when at least one possibility has been found
that proves the move to be no better than a previously examined move."
++ 1 Nh3 is no better than 1 Nf3. 1 e4 e5 2 Ba6? is no better than 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3
"Such moves need not be evaluated further."
++ Thus 1 Nh3 and 1 e4 e5 2 Ba6? need not be evaluated further.
"When applied to a standard minimax tree, it returns the same move as minimax would,
but prunes away branches that cannot possibly influence the final decision."
++ The branches 1 Nh3 and 1 e4 e5 2 Ba6? cannot possibly influence the final decision.
@6482
After this formalistic intermezzo, can we now agree in your lingo that
the value to white of the position after 1. Nh3 <= the value to white of the position after 1. Nf3
and
the value to white of the position after 1. e4 e5 2 Ba6 <= the value to white of the position after 1. e4 e5 2 Nf3
As chess players willing to take a good bet we could.
But game theorists trying to solve chess definitely cannot. These results are unproven, just like it is unproven that chess is a draw, and just like until recent history it was unproven that checkers was a draw (until it was proved).
You are the former.