Chess will never be solved, here's why

Sort:
playerafar
BigChessplayer665 wrote:

Not trying to shut you up rn I just want you to answer the question 💀 which your avoiding

Of course you are.
You're fake as could be.
But its funny now.
Your 'anger' was probably fake too.
happy

playerafar

Dio is funnier than you are though BC. But without being phony.
And tygxc is more likeable than you.
But keep trying.

BigChessplayer665

Sigh... Redirecting it again

Just answer the question it isn't that hard

Maybe if you would answer a question instead of redirect it towards criticizing someone else you would win an argument

It's funny cause the Republicans all try not to answer the question like the Republicans that can't answer and gloss over it "would I except election results of ____ didn't win and the Democrats did"

I'm not even asking a trick question lol

playerafar

Yes ... your Sigh. Again.
That's all I read.
I skipped reading the rest of your post BC.

BigChessplayer665

Cause you can't answer a question

BigChessplayer665

I made one typo cause Google autocorrect lol

But actually tho u know your glossing over the question stop faking it playforfar

playerafar
BigChessplayer665 wrote:

Cause you can't answer a question

translation of that post.
You have no power here.
And good thing.
Keep trying though.
I'll log off so that you can get last post.
Then you can go to bed.

BigChessplayer665
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:

Why is someone, whose account is older than I myself am, trolling and acting like a kid?

I dunno I think it is cause I asked him why he talks here but doesn't play chess

He's not using chess.com for its intended purpose I would like to know why PLEASE

playerafar
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:

Why is someone, whose account is older than I myself am, trolling and acting like a kid?

TKDE
BC wants to 'draw me in. Into pingpong.
Impose his definition of what the site is for.
Good luck with that.
I'm logging off now.
Maybe that'll help him out.
I'll check back later.
You're an alt account?
Apparently some people know what your previous account was.
If you want to talk the forum subject - you can always do so instead of complaining.
Right?
Wise up guy.

BigChessplayer665

He's not complaining he's questioning the same thing could be said of you I have plenty of examples of you doing the exact same thing he is except ten times worse 😂

playerafar

You two can pingpong each other now.

BigChessplayer665

You know I think switching to gen z style argument fried his brain he's avoiding question

Why u play no chess u only talk

Why not chess.com discord or some other place better than this

Tell me why and I'll stop bugging u

BigChessplayer665

I think optimized is right playforfar is just a troll

But dio also has some reasoning for not liking optimissed

playerafar

TDKE you're not talking about chess.
Your're being hypocritical. Like BC.
Its obvious.
But unlike you and BC - I won't try to shut you up.
Lets see how long you'll keep being hypocritical.
When I check back again - you'll still be complaining here.
Doing that which you stupidly complain about.
BC 'cured' of that.
Maybe you're both trying to get the forum locked.

BigChessplayer665

Lets see how long you will avoid answering the question for

Why play no chess only talk on forums

Btw he has a diamond account doesn't even play chess that doesn't matter tho

Your throwing the word hypocrite like it means something probably because you know your the hypocrite

Answer the question and I won't annoy you simple

Continue to avoid it I will progressively get more annoying I'm a master at annoyance

I'm not trying to shut you up I'm trying to get you to answer a question

playerafar

BC maybe you're one of those 'still waiting for answer' idiotic people.
You're going to say tomorrow and next week
'still waiting'.
You've got no conversation and neither does the other new guy.
How to keep a person idiotically repeating his questions in suspense.
Its easy.
You two can add another ten new alt accounts here and all back each other up and you'll still all be 'losing and hypocritical'.
Scrolling back through pages here - neither of you are really talking about the forum subject.
The other new guy who's had an account here for four days apparently just wants to beat up on tygxc. He's another phony.

BigChessplayer665

Yep took 20 min for a troll post🤦... Im disappointed

Again answer the question

Why do you not play any chess only talk on forums

BigChessplayer665

If you think you can win against gen z in a troll war your mistaken

playerafar
jimbalter wrote:
tygxc wrote:

@9448

"current analysis INDICATES that g4 loses"
++ That are weasel words. It either loses, draws, or wins. In this case 1 g4? loses.
That is also the lingo of Fischer and Caruana for other positions: 'it loses by force'.
Losing by force may take 60 moves, but is inevitable.

You don't understand what words mean. No wonder no one agrees with you. The only mystery is why people continue to debate you when you are wrong on basic semantics, let alone the math (which I haven't looked at, but there's no point in bothering).

P.S. You and BC are made for each other.

but jimbalter left. He didn't understand why 'weakly solving' is poor terminology. 'Solving' implies strength.
There should be a better phrase for 'weakly solving'.
But I haven't thought of one yet.
'Partial solving' looks a little better.
Everytime a player sets a piece down and accurately calls checkmate - that's 'real solving'. Or when a computer ends a game that way.
Anyway - g4 does not 'lose'.
I don't think its the worst move either.
I disagree with tygxc but that's okay and he's okay.
And 'O' is rightly criticized by others and blocked and exposed.
Others will not be able to shut up people doing so.
------------------------------------------
Apparently 1) Na3 is bottom ranked on some lists.
But I think 1) Nh3 could be worse.
1) g4 - the Grob opening can be a weapon against somebody who doesn't know how to play against it.
Maybe its the 'worst move' when its tried against computers.
Or with computer against computer.

tygxc

@9965

"chess isn't proven to be a draw"
++ Chess is proven to be a draw:
106 draws out of 106 games in the ICCF World Championship Finals.
17 ICCF (grand)masters with engines at 5 days/move average.

Most plausible explanation:
Games with 0 error: 106
Games with 1 error: 0
Games with 2 errors: 0
Games with 3 errors: 0
Games with 4 errors: 0

I am willing to accept the possibility that the distribution might be
Games with 0 error: 105
Games with 1 error: 0
Games with 2 errors: 1
Games with 3 errors: 0
Games with 4 errors: 0

That still leaves 105 perfect games with 0 error and chess being a draw.