Oh, so you're changed your mind. Previously you were arguing that the second player wins by force but it didn't seem likely, somehow. The idea of black being able to obtain a winning zugzwang by force could never be demonstrated and that is because the possibility doesn't exist but even if it did exist, it couldn't be demonstrated, ever.
I don't remember ever saying that. Of course it's possible, but that's not something I would suggest.
White wins by force because white moves first. Forcing, probably through many different paths, multiple middle games where it's a forced mate in a certain amount of moves. Probably in the thousands.
I also remember you saying black wins by force on a few occasions in this thread. You never gave any reasons for that statement so I took it as a jab at those who claimed it was so impossible that it need not be investigated.
My opinion is that chess is most likely inherently a draw, but by no means can that be claimed to be a proven fact.
I said it's possible that black could win, but not likely. The only way black could win, in my opinion, is if they go first. I also said chess could be a draw. But that also is unlikely in my opinion. I never said black has a forced win from the opening position.
Not that it matters, proving white has a win wont happen for at least a couple hundred years.
The first move advantage is not very significant. It only controls the way some openings can be played. If we assume that perfect play means that the player is familiar and knows all openings, then Black can respond accordingly and maintain a draw. It will of course be harder for black but with PERFECT play it will be a draw.
I have seen your comments on other threads and they have been reasonable. I hope you take my points into consideration.
I agree with your first sentence. I've seen players and computers force a win with an advantage that is "not very significant". I would say even a far less advantage is all it takes to force a win.
I think of it as compounded interest in your savings account. Or I guess what some people call the butterfly effect. A very small, very insignificant, very miniscule effect. But over time, it grows.
I know some people think the first move advantage fades, and eventually vanishes. But I think the opposite. I think it's like the tiny percentage of interest you earn on your savings account that's compounded. At first, it's basically nothing. Even after a while it's not enough to even bother with. But after a few weeks, a few months, then a few years, the change is noticeable.
Eventually the change is huge. It's undeniable. It becomes overwhelming. Because of the crude and limited power of todays computers this change cannot be noticed. Todays computers are still in their infancy, not even toddlers. But eventually, probably in about 200 years, they will mature a little bit. They will begin to see the significance of small advantages. Like so many of mans achievements, looking back it becomes obvious why it was never discovered. The knowledge, the technology, the wisdom, the building on previous discoveries takes time.
Yes, chess is a forced win for white. But as so many have said here, does it really matter?
No doubt at all. You can try to alter reality but that's what you repeatedly claimed.
React to this message with
if you think it's a win for White, 
if you think it's a win for Black, and 
if you think it's a draw.