Is Chess on the verge of being solved?

antioxidant
RooksBailey wrote:

I can't help but to think this is the beginning of the end of traditional chess.  The computer scientist who solved the Kings Gambit has said that he is going to solve other openings as well.  While no player will be able to commit to memory every possible line of play for an OTB game, once the "solutions" are posted online - as the computer scientist said he is going to do - CC play is going to be ruined because people will just consult the file for each move. 

Looks like it is time to abandon traditional chess for Chess960.  Somewhere Fischer is smiling.

antioxidant

thanks there is still chess 960 if we arrive at that moment in time where traditional chess is already database., where it will become obsolete.

AndyClifton
ncpharaoh wrote:

I still stand by my opinion.

Fortunately, I don't remember what it was.

TyrannusVerticalis

In the distant future, the computer capacity may exist to reduce all possible chess positions to a Nalimov table base analogue.

But our brains will never be able to retain all that data for OTB play.

RooksBailey
madhacker wrote:

Chessbase just admitted it was an April fool

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8051

Thank the Lord!  I could kiss you for posting this link!  Kiss  I believed the article and was really depressed yesterday because I thought my favorite game of all time was on the verge of being ruined! 

What a relief!

AndyClifton

Indeed, there has never been cause to worry:

antioxidant

my nephew dont play good chess but he plays playstation .there is so called emulator which is like a database for chess and can research for his moves just by cellphone.ive tried playing with my nephew but i won butmy winning didnt reflect much of it because he was not accomodated of something he forget to avail of the emulator .am not familiar with cellphone as it is very little for me to read and to punch so i hate cellphone but with database already existing i dont wonder why they find best moves if they know of it.,but i dont think they will have a respect for winning in their own way because it is another form of cheating.

crtlew

Using an emulator is cheating in tournament play.  In any case how can anyone progress his own chess game unless they use their own mellon?  Losing is one of the best way to progress, not computers guidance and a fake high rating. 

antioxidant

yes i have plenty of losses to a lower rated players than me,i have been playing chess according to my wits and knowledge and experience from continous playing .it doesnt matter anymore to me  as i am already old,i just  dont understand why they should have high respect for themselves  inspite of consultation to database and still happy about winning.

antioxidant

yes i have plenty of losses to a lower rated players than me,i have been playing chess according to my wits and knowledge and experience from continous playing .it doesnt matter anymore to me  as i am already old,i just  dont understand why they should have high respect for themselves  inspite of consultation to database and still happy about winning.

antioxidant
chrisr2212 wrote:

you'd be surprised how many people enjoy deceiving themselves

antioxidant

ive been reading about psychology books for every other day,i found out lion stands for self interest, the greediest part of nature which we we call the lions share in idioms where everything falls for the lions mind.

antioxidant

i am reading psychology books every other day,people are like lions in constant search for prey .no matter what it is for self preservation or lions share in idioms what is obtainable is obtainable,lions are the most expess  formin animals same also with nature of mankind., form of the greediest form of animals and also to mankind.which to ethics is the end does not justify the means and vice versa.

antioxidant
[COMMENT DELETED]
stpasta
Shivsky wrote:

Wouldn't solve something from a "computer programming" perspective  be having a lookup table that has "best move" responses from any theoretically possible position on the board?

If by "theoretically possible position" you mean position that reachable from the starting formation, then yes. This is different than every possible allotment of pieces on the board. e.g. it's theoretically possible (in one sense) to have pawns on both players' back rows, and (in another sense) it is also theoretically impossible. e.g. it's theoretically possible to have a board with a white pawn in every square in one sense, but in another sense it's not.

AndyClifton

I certainly hope chess is on the verge of being solved (it's starting to get a bit annoying).

Xoque55

Hopefully, humanity will never solve chess. If chess does become "solved," then no one will ever want to sit down to play the greatest game ever invented. Both players would know which color (White or Black) is theoretically supposed to win so there would be no point to ever playing. We would all still play chess occasionally, but they're would never be any formal competitions, exhibitions, or clubs.

A perfect example of this phenomenon is what has happened to Tic-Tac-Toe. Most of us have had experience with a classmate writing in a notebook in some boring class/study hall or with chalk out on a playground. But once we learned the few rules to never lose a game (and often draw games), Tic-Tac-Toe became "solved" because its complexity was so low. Now, there is never any formal competition or professional association to sponsor Tic-Tac-Toe!

Let us hope that never happens to Chess!

AndyClifton

On the plus side, at least we would finally know what the best moves are.

TheGrobe

Well, there's a key difference in that it's possible for a human to play a perfect game of tic-tac-toe regardless of how his opponent plays. This would not be the case with chess, so I really doubt human play would be affected. It would be nothing more than an interesting academic occurrence.

windows96

The one who solves chess will die!