What do you mean by solved? There are computers that cannot be beaten already. Is that solved? Or just a measure of current technology? As time goes on more technology will allow everything to be solved so the answer is yes.
Your question is answered on page 1 on the thread.
no it isnt
How is it not solved???
i told u get out of here, yeah theres the occasional interesting bit of info but this forum is a WASTE.
It is ultimately a waste, but the phenom just demonstrated by SuperBikeQueen of arriving on the thread but not even reading the first pages shows why the crackpots have to be repeatedly refuted over time to prevent their insanity from spreading around. Not doing so eventually leads to bad results like most of the world believing that Kasparov has a 180 IQ, etc.
Imagine going to Reddit or something and one day reading a thread about solving chess and then seeing somebody say:
"I read an authority on the subject who says that the problem space can easily be reduced to 10^17 positions and who proved that the ICCF results already proves chess is weakly solved, and that seems to be the consensus because there is no opposition of note."
Cringeworthy, no?
magnus solved it
You my friend are either a troll or nieve
I prefer to think a joker
It's actually a silly question... Right up there with topics of Religion and Politics. Like can God be proven to exist. Can Poverty be eliminated. It's all worthless conjecture and speculation and the answer is nobody knows and everyone thinks they are right. Anything MAN MADE can be solved with time and money. End of discussion. There, i ruined your silly post.
magnus solved it
You my friend are either a troll or nieve
I prefer to think a joker
this guy doesnt know im the Albert Einstien of chess
With a rating of 400 i even Albert Einstein was higher with his 1900 rating, I think you are Crap in the saying Crap for brains.
magnus solved it
You my friend are either a troll or nieve
I prefer to think a joker
this guy doesnt know im the Albert Einstien of chess
Ok Einstein meet newton
what would you know. your probably some woman who spends 99% of your day at the mirror.🤣
Technically a phone can be a mirror so isn't that what your doing
talking about superbikerqueen
Never mind lol
i told u get out of here, yeah theres the occasional interesting bit of info but this forum is a WASTE.
It is ultimately a waste, but the phenom just demonstrated by SuperBikeQueen of arriving on the thread but not even reading the first pages shows why the crackpots have to be repeatedly refuted over time to prevent their insanity from spreading around. Not doing so eventually leads to bad results like most the world believing that Kasparov has a 180 IQ, etc.
Imagine going to Reddit or something and one day reading a thread about solving chess and then seeing somebody say:
"I read an authority on the subject who says that the problem space can easily be reduced to 10^17 positions and who proved that the ICCF results already proves chess is weakly solved, and that seems to be the consensus because there is no opposition of note."
Cringeworthy, no?
well yeah thats literally why im here, to be the guy (among others) that corrects tygxc. you guys deal with opt.
but its not worth it for others who arent going to go all in.
why you have continue this solved topic?
because there are those on the thread who continue to spread lies and misinformation. a few of us have stayed behind to correct their falsehoods to make sure that nobody is misinformed/
why you have continue this solved topic?
Some people don't understand statistics .... We have to correct them
Also chess is not solved now you go draw every game (oh wait... )
what would you know. your probably some woman who spends 99% of your day at the mirror.🤣
Wow, a sexist remark. Typical. Unless it's breathing it's not even possible to spend 99% doing anything for a whole day! Grow up.
Technically a phone can be a mirror so isn't that what your doing
superbikerqueen i find it strange that you joined 10 days ago, and have won most of your games.
I find it strange that YOU are strange
It's complex for YOU, dorkbrain, because you would have to remember several things I wrote and there are several parts to the argument explaining why the maths department here are no better than tygxc and actually a fair bit worse. Since they (you) demand a deductive argument from the scientific department (science doesn't produce deductive arguments as a rule although that CAN be part of science) then it's only fair to demand a deductive argument from the maths department and I showed it's impossible since what they propose to do, solving-wise, also counts as a scientific experiment. No proof that it's accurate, that the programs are correct etc etc. It doesn't stand as a deductive acgument.
I had hopes for MEGA but I'm afraid he's as useless as you. How do you intend to "deal" with me, when I can run rings round you except you're too dumb to know when you lost an argument? You really are incredibly dense. Pretentious isn't the word for you. Crazy really is and it turns out that after writing nearly one decent post with only a few mistakes, Mega has used his brain this year and he has to fill in the application form again or pay his subscription to ChatGwhatsit. You're just kids except you're, what, 62? Eleven years younger than me and you act like a nonogenarian with the palsy. You re TOTALLY out of your league and always have been. Even your chess rating is about 202.
You answered this post rather than the one where I made your own argument more clear and succinct and then pointed out the problems with it, I see. I expect it was the other post that made you blow your gasket here, but from your perspective I guess it is probably better to respond to this one and not invite much scrutiny of the fact that you have no answers.
I'm not in my 60s yet, old man. Your juvenile insults about everything else but the subject at hand just betray your inability to engage me in any kind of logical/reasonable way. "Dorkbrain"? Palsy? Are these really your best attempts...?
superbikerqueen i find it strange that you joined 10 days ago, and have won most of your games.
I find it strange that YOU are strange
thats the only answer she can give cus she knows she's a cheater
Bro you accuse everyone for being s cheater lmao
I don't think you know how to catch cheaters you just see "numbers go up" and clame cheater from what I can tell
Chess, like many other games and puzzles, has different layers of complexity and meaning depending on how you approach it. From a competitive standpoint, where the goal is to win, many argue that chess has been "solved" to some extent by top players who have mastered its strategies and tactics. However, if you view chess as a creative and infinite exploration of possibilities, then it can never truly be solved, as there will always be new positions and ideas to discover. So, whether chess is "solved" or not depends on your perspective and how you choose to engage with the game.
No, whether chess is considered solved depends on a very exact set of definitions for solving games:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved_game
You would have known this if you read any of the thread before opining...
superbikerqueen i find it strange that you joined 10 days ago, and have won most of your games.
I find it strange that YOU are strange
thats the only answer she can give cus she knows she's a cheater
How do you cheat at bullet? I play tournaments, 30 secs. I wouldnt know how to cheat. And im new to this site. I have played on other sites. Is this how you treat new players? I suggest you read the community guidelines and act accordingly. So rude!
Bro you accuse everyone for being s cheater lmao
I don't think you know how to catch cheaters you just see "numbers go up" and clame cheater from what I can tell
This is for optimissed not you lmao
i know right BC665 ?...3rd ppl in are such wimps !
heres another ex..."Only according to yourself." (Doofus DDue)
i told u get out of here, yeah theres the occasional interesting bit of info but this forum is a WASTE.