"change in the 50 move rule" ++ The 50-moves rule plays no role. The weak solution of Chess reaches a draw without triggering the 50-moves rule. We know that from the perfect games with 0 errors of ICCF WC draws.
"it may have a considerable effect on perfect play"
++ The 50-moves rule has no effect at all on perfect play from the initial position.
Most perfect games are drawn before move 50.>>>
This is nonsense. Of course the 50 move rule cannot be taken to influence perfect play. The question of whether a game is won or drawn inside or outside 50 moves has no bearing on a solution of chess ...... only on the outcome of a game. These are two very different things. Just another source of confusion which is natural in any conversation where the participants are completely incapable of defining their terms because they are frightened or incapable of breaking away from the old, confusing and inefficient terminology.
It's funny watching tygxc, who consistently misses better arguments for the snippets of his viewpoint that he gets right, as well as the complete failure of others to make him pay for his bad arguments, because they indulge in endless waffle and don't seem to be able to use logic to home in on a productive argument.
@8997
"my figures explain the facts in your example reasonably well" ++ No they do not.
"I could easily fit them exactly" ++ Well do so and let us see.
"observed facts in any of the four of the examples I posted"
++ Are the 4 positions draws? No
Is this a tournament? No
Is this a sufficiently large tournament? No
Is this a sufficiently strong tournament? No
Is this relevant to weakly solving Chess? No
"we have no way of observing them?" ++ We have.
"The value 24 is the expected value given my assumed probability distribution"
++ as there were only 15 decisive games, your assumed probability distribution is wrong
"the actual number of games with 0 blunders must be exactly the expected number from the distribution" ++ Indeed, the task is to explain the observed facts.
"it also produces a proof that chess is a win" ++ No, it does not.
"exactly 83 games with the wrong result and that's not 15 either"
++ So your distribution is wrong.
"Assuming that chess is a win would minimise the differences"
++ No, it is not consistent with the observed facts.
"there are many sequences of 3 that are" ++ But not all are.
"Your proposals are to use SF15 v SF15" ++ No. My proposal to weakly solve Chess is to use SF to calculate until the 7-men endgame table base.
"SF15 is about the strongest player that ever was." ++ ICCF is stronger: human + SF.
Otherwise there would be no ICCF GM: John Doe would be World Champion.
"There were 46 games" ++ There were no games.
There were continuations from 4 irrelevant won positions. There was only 1 entity playing.
"What's the sufficiently large"
++ 136 games and 17 entities like ICCF WC Finals is sufficiently large.
"a Poisson distribution to magically appear?" ++ A Poisson distribution does not 'magically' appear. It is there, but it shows more clearly with a larger sample size.
"They were designed to test the plausibility of a Poisson distribution" ++ Bad design.
"But we've already shown that a Poisson distribution doesn't apply." ++ No, not at all.
"the blunder rates show a marked increase with the number of men from such positions"
++ Most errors should occur with around 26 men, as Chess is most complex then.
"I guess it would be conservatively closer to 10 from the initial position"
++ The initial position has been extensively studied.
"change in the 50 move rule" ++ The 50-moves rule plays no role. The weak solution of Chess reaches a draw without triggering the 50-moves rule. We know that from the perfect games with 0 errors of ICCF WC draws.
"it may have a considerable effect on perfect play"
++ The 50-moves rule has no effect at all on perfect play from the initial position.
Most perfect games are drawn before move 50.