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.
@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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
<<<Solving chess consists of finding an optimal strategy for the game of chess; that is, one by which one of the players (White or Black) can always force a victory, or either can force a draw (see solved game). It also means more generally solving chess-like games (i.e. combinatorial games of perfect information), such as Capablanca chess and infinite chess. According to Zermelo's theorem, a determinable optimal strategy must exist for chess and chess-like games.>>>
Here, strategy is being used in a different context or with a different meaning from how it is being used in this forum, where strategy seems to represent a permutation of moves. It's incorrect and confusing to call a series of moves a strategy, when it merely consists of finding the best moves available. The strategy is to find the best moves.
In the wiki article, strategy seems to be used differently in that an assumption is made that there is an optimal manner of pursuing the game of chess. That simply isn't true, because if chess is a draw by force, there will be myriads of lines that lead to a draw with best play by both sides. The assumption that there is exactly one drawing line and all the rest are wins is ridiculous. Since there's no evidence for it, we have to go by probability theory, which gives approximately zero chance of that being true. Therefore, the lines that are "best" will be those which are to the taste of individual players. Individual preference.
I don't know what this Zermelo's theory is and I'm going to look it up. I think it cannot possibly be relevant to chess and it is evident that the Wiki article isn't written by experts. Maybe it's based on out-of-date ideas from 25 or 50 years ago.
@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.
No you don't, actually. 2. Ba6 definitely loses and any good chess player knows that after looking at the position for a few minutes. The opinions of very weak players are irrelevant.
@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.
@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.
No you don't, actually. 2. Ba6 definitely loses and any good chess player knows that after looking at the position for a few minutes. The opinions of very weak players are irrelevant.
okay, prove it. prove it objectively. 100%.
@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.
you cant just give two examples and claim you have a full strategy stealing proof.
fun fact, that proof doesnt exist.
you have to prove that every position that black reaches could also be reached by white.
@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.
"Taking Three as the subject to reason about--
A convenient number to state--
We add Seven, and Ten, and then multiply out
By One Thousand diminished by Eight.
"The result we proceed to divide, as you see,
By Nine Hundred and Ninety Two:
Then subtract Seventeen, and the answer must be
Exactly and perfectly true.
Lewis Carroll was an expert on logic who published numerous peer reviewed articles on the subject, so I think we can safely assume his method is superior to yours.
There are 3 x 10^0 relevant positions.
The problem is we also need a solution for the irrelevant ones.
@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.