Is Chess a Draw with Best Play from Both Sides?

Since I am blocked from the other thread. I have to make a new one.

I m doing this not to create another confusion. But I am very eager to answer Symlov Fan last post in the other thread. Thanks that I m blocked.

SymslovFan claims that:

There is more evidence than this, but these three points have not been refuted in this forum.

I am not satisfied with any arguments either Chess is a draw or not a draw. I have found no satisfying arguments from either sides.

As for Sysmlov Fan. I will take my favorite The Last Fermat Theorem again.

For centuries, people and computers tried to prove either against or for the Theorem. Yet, it is not proven until proven.

Sure, over centuries nothing has been found against it. Yet, it is not proven.

To say there is no win or lose for Chess is too early without satisfying evidence.

There is also no evidence that Chess can be played to  a drawn position.

To eliminate so much possibilities that Chess can be played to a Win or Lose is premature.

In this case we have to rely on the experts. Yet we find no experts. There are many top players, but are they justified to say what's beyond thir ability?

So again, the question reamins open like The Sky is Blue. And there is no need to claim eithe Chess is a draw or not. It's more fun to leave it open. Rather than claim something that is not 100% true and take away the fun.

I didn't take part in the original thread, but my opinion on this matter aims towards the draw. If you think about it, most openings that are played in search for a win, are usually asymetrical and tend to highlight the imbalances. (like the Sicilian defense and all white gambits). However, the more or less recognizable success theese openings have had in proving their usefullness has to do with said "double-edge" situation that leads us mortal into making mistakes or imprecise moves.

Ultimately, I'm a firm believer of the known phrase that claims "In Chess the winner is the palyer who makes the second to last mistake" . That being said, if black plays for a draw and makes no mistakes I would guess it is mathematically impossible for white to earn a win just from the 1 tempo advantage. Just take a look at history and you'll see every white win is against a black player either playing for a win or making mistakes.

This remains an opinion thou...

Best play from both sides is hard to find. There are 3 stages in Chess: Opening, Middle-game, and End-game. One can be good in one of these stages, yet mediocre in the others. So to find 2 players equally best is almost impossible, even engines.

The "double edge" situation is a good refutation to Chess is a Draw. Afterall, win and Lose are unbalance situation.

In any sports, sportsmen and women try to achieve perfection. But what is perfection? In this world, perfection is almost impossible.

We know there is a winner on Kasparov vs Anand, or Anand vs Carlsen. So, one player is better than the other. Even among engines, there is a winner eventually.

Players make mistakes, engines make mistakes. It is difficult to find best moves in Chess. Let alone Perfection.

I remain open on whether Chess is a Draw and The Sky is Blue. I prefer the last.

Well I agree on prety much all you said, but this is a theorical discussion. In the practical world I don't believe we will ever see an answer to this dilema exactly for the reasons you explained: Perfection is (almost?) impossible.

So my thoughts are:

In real life - Chess cannot be "solved" nor will we live to see this happen. (fortunately). Games between two oposing wills trying to beat each other will allways tend to a win by the strongest of them no matter how small their skill difference is. (this is common sense)

In a theorical situation - If both sides could play perfectly well, black would eventually equalize the game. I insist... given both sides have the same potential forces, only 1 tempo advantage doesn't look like enough to garantee a white win. Specially since there are so many resources to draw even in inferior material situations. (this is a personal opinion)

You just cannot make up theory out of nothing.

I don't say white wins. Nor I say it's a draw. Like The Sky is Blue, you can argue with Abbot and Castello style.

Why do you have to insist on anything unclear?

Hi Mr. Bean !....(eagerly reading)....everyone - go on....

Hi Indiana. Thanks for stopping by.

Oh... now that I read over again your first post I see what you really are looking for is a more empiric discussion with people eager to PROVE how chess is or is NOT a draw. If that's the case I'm afraid I can't help you out here.

You're right when you say theory can't be made out of nothing, and that's why I labelled my thought as an "opinion" and not a fact. Everyone is free to think otherwise. 

But then again, I'm not a fundamentalist when it comes to logic so I'm afraid I will not even try to find a mathematical theorem to prove right that vague opinion of mine. Of course I wouldn't mind someone else trying; it would be a fun read.

Oh dear.

It's not you specifically who has been blocked from posting in that thread, it has been locked by staff upon the request of the OP.

Where does the assumption that it had to be resurrected come from? Oh wait, let me guess. "All GMs" are "probably somewhat likely to be suspected to possibly hold a belief" that such a thread must exist and be open at chess.com at any time.

I'm in (and out) before the inevitable

"...you're very clever, young man, very clever... but it's  all draws - all the way down...!!"

1) "Mad" in a figurative sense, perhaps (if judging by the once more a bit excessive formatting, that is).

2) Yes, 1994, if I'm not mistaken.

By the way, this popular documentary from some years ago (when FLT was still unproven) that I recalled may be an interesting watch. Chess in particular is discussed since 36'00''.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5perbJaJps

3) Whether this is going to happen or not will remain undetermined, unless it does happen.

 * * *

@richie_and_oprah:

"q: is chess a draw with best play from both sides?
a: all evidence so far indicates yes"

How much is the thumbnail of my avatar which is visible in my forum posts (it may actually change its appearance from time to time depending on how it happens to be cached) an evidence of what the actual image is (visible when going to my profile)...?

 * * *

Here a part of a discussion (in German) of the "Let's Check" feature from Fritz 13 with Mathias Feist (Chessbase lead GUI programmer):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLTKybQ6B0Q

8' 50'' (English translation):

Andre Schulz (host): "...perhaps the starting position is not at all drawn as Kasparov believes it to be..."
Mathias Feist: (laughs)
Andre Schulz: "...perhaps it does yield a win...?"
Mathias Feist: "...this is pretty much possible, exactly..."
Andre Schulz: "OK... thanks!"