Chess will never be solved, here's why

hi

Yes, that's an example of the sort of compromise I was talking about, but it doesn't adequately represent all of the versions of chess I mentioned and I don't think the code is publicly available.

MAR you conflate player conduct + officiating rules with the rules of the game.

Checkers has all the same "issues" that you claim chess has, yet I don't see you disputing the claim that checkers has been solved.

@MEGACHE3SE

I don't think I'm conflating the two. I suggested jettisoning all but the 3R/5R and 50M/70M in producing a mathematical model of FIDE competition rules chess, but the rules of the game would generally be taken as the FIDE handbook and that does include rules concerning clocks and arbiters and conduct etc.

What would you say are the rules of the game (and do you think "game" is correctly used in the singular)? Where would you see authoritative descriptions?

And I have questioned whether checkers has been solved. I'm far from convinced, but that's a topic for a different thread. (Actually I don't remember noticing any of the isssues I mentioned the last time I looked at the rules for checkers. Can you give examples?)

you literally are. nothing that you brought up is about the state of the board. An easy demonstration of that is the fact that none of what you claimed has any effect on chess.com games.

chess as an abstraction is the rules of the board, piece positions, and the defined outcome of each move on the board. stuff like the 50-move rule are variations.

easy example for checkers is your claim of the situation of both players resigning simultaneously. btw - simultaneously according to who? you assume that the events are evaluated to be at the same time.

Yes you're correct. The simultaneous event ambiguities are not resolved there either.

Without that resolution you can't actually solve the game.

Simultaneously would usually be taken to mean nobody involved in the game could distinguish any separation between the events occurring.

Going by FIDE rules, the game is already solved: bribe the officials to give you the win every game.

In tournament checkers I would say that scenario would or should lead to neither player getting a point nor a half point for the game.
It would be like they both didn't show up.
And the same for rating purposes. The game doesn't count.
Same with chess.
Sandbagger: 'Shucks. Lost the chance to lose rating points.'
Compare 'draw by agreement' with handshake and signed game forms to
'mutual resign by agreement'
Spontaneous mutual resignation?
TD: Which of you resigned first?
'We don't know'.

To be fair, as I understand it, the auto-mutes may automatically escalate the mute timeframe if someone does not have a long enough "cooldown" period since their last mute to reset the counter. So it's hard to tell.

The role of the arbiter in the basic rules game is limited to deciding whether an assistant proposed for a player who is unable to move the pieces is acceptable to him. He has no power to award a win.

Even if he did, youl'd still have either failed to achieve the object of the game or wasted your money.

He's like a Zener diode that likes to go into thermal runaway...flashy, but the circuit is broken as a result.

It has only been a week since he was muted last probably less so it is probably longer this time

Also - if a person is a repeat offender maybe the auto-censor assigns a longer mute.
But those auto censors usually apply to PM's.
Plus at the time of his six day mute several days - O 'just happened' to be talking about reporting people.
He seems to think everyone except him was born yesterday.
Its no wonder that everyone does better than him.
Plus after - he tried to claim he committed no offenses at all.
The reverse is true.

He hasn't won one.

He just attackdls/trolls then wins cause you can't do anything about that nonsense on the Internet

Rather looses then gets muted

Maybe you also believe the sky is green.
And hey - there's flat-earthism too.
You're entitled.
Does the website allow flat-earthism in the public forums?
Geocentrism?
I don't know. I haven't seen them in the public forums.
It allows evolution-denial and denial of manmade global warming though.

You win the game every time so its solved by definition. I also didnt say "arbiter" I said "officials"

your language of "the object of the game" is you conflating the board rules with conduct rules again, checkmate is only a position on the board, that doesnt necessarily mean anything in FIDE rules. the optimal result of FIDE rules is a mark indicating a victory point.

bribing officials is a guarantee of that. (provided the other player isnt also using this strategy)

an equivalent solution of FIDE chess is to threaten harm upon the family of the other player unless they immediately resign.

I gather he's gone again. Every time he goes he takes half the thread with him and breaks all the back links in anybody else's posts.