I repeat. Chess is a game of error(gm Soltis). No human is perfect. It is impossible for a human to play perfect chess.Also, Ponz, an appeal to authority is one of the oldest propaganda devices, as well as one of the infomal fallacies of logic. In other words, saying all experts believe X; therefore it must be true is not a valid argument.
True or False Chess is a Draw with Best Play from Both Sides
Sort:
Aug 20, 2019
0
#2423
IMBacon escribió:
Prometheus_Fuschs wrote:
IMBacon escribió:
Prometheus_Fuschs wrote:
IMBacon escribió:
Prometheus_Fuschs wrote:
None of them know, the believe so and so do I but there's a difference between knowing and believing.
With all things being equal. What result would you expect besides a draw?
Win for white or black?
How? If all things are equal?
But all things aren't equal...
If you meant chess then having to move first is a difference.
You match 2 exactly even opponents, with exactly the same amount of time, and with the exact same conditions for both players. What result would you expect?
But that's not possible because there is an inherent (dis)advantage of moving first.
In any case, ignoring that fact, I expect a draw but white has a better chance to win.
Also, nobody plays perfectly so my reply to your question is irrelevant.
Opti. Calling people fools does nothing to advance any argument you wish to present.
Optimissed wrote:
This discussion about whether perfect play actually exists is a silly one, since the concept of perfect play is obviously an ideal. I accept that there will be people who don't understand what ideals are, however.
One doesn't need to go through endless lines of play to understand this. The question can be put differently. Since it's normally accepted that white has some small advantage which ideally diminishes as the game progresses, can white force a win in chess from the opening position?
Since I think that evidence suggests that only a fool would think that white can force a win against perfect play (that ideal!) by black, it is clear that only a fool will imagine that chess is not a draw with perfect play. The only thing preventing some people from understanding this is they don't appear to understand that "perfect play" is an ideal .... instead, they imagine that it must be represented by this or that line of moves.
So, are the people who are arguing this case trolling? It's certainly an incorrect argument, that we cannot know that chess is a draw because no win can be forced given correct play (drop the word "perfect") by either side. But people probably like the incorrect argument because they can't see a proof for the correct one. No imagination.
I'm a fool then. I dont know if either side can force a win from the beginning. But because I've never seen (or maybe understand) what ideal or perfect is, how could I not be a fool? Once I understand what perfect is, or see it at least, THEN maybe I'll understand that chess is a draw (or forced win) with ideal play. I've just never seen it so I cant rule out the possibility that one side has an advantage that can lead to a forced win.
If I had to guess, and it's only a guess, I think eventually white will have a forced win or at least a higher winning percentage.
I want to see everyone in this forum in the squared circle and everything goes! 😃
When Soltis says chess is a game of errors --he does not mean every single game is a game of errors. Of course he knows it is possible to play a game of chess without error.
appeal to authority is not in itself--a logical fallacy. Most appeals to authority are made with the sample size of "authority" does not have special skills. If we know the vast majority of doctors believe in a certain medical procedure--that can be a legitimate appeal to authority. Also if we know that virtually every grandmaster believes something about chess--you can be pretty sure they are correct.
For those who believe that with best play the game of chess will end in a win for White [or Black]--they are just sadly lacking in chess knowledge.
There are many reasons that virtually every grandmaster believes chess is a draw with best play.
Nobody really has absolute certainty about anything. So when someone like me or a grandmaster says he "knows" chess is a draw--he is not saying he knows with 100% certainty as he does not know anything with absolute certainty.
But for sure I would "bet" my life against $100 that I am correct.
Aug 20, 2019
0
#2428
Tepeyac wrote:
I want to see everyone in this forum in the squared circle and everything goes! 😃
I remember when i had my first beer...
You could get experts to agree on either side of this proposition. That does not make your proposition correct or the only view. The greatest lesson I have learned from chess(and life) is to question authority. It is not always correct.
You should listen carefully to a lot of the logical arguments people are making, instead of calling them fools. It appears that you started a discussion(three years ago) in which you are not really interested in hearing different viewpoints. You just want to hear confirmation of your viewpoint. Sorry but that is not discussion.
Chess cannot be played without error. Why? because no human in any contest has the ability to play a perfect game. A game may seem perfect to you(using your own definition) and yet only seem to be perfect.
Again, no human is perfect, not in any human contest. A result may suggest to you perfection, but I would argue that that is merely a suggestion, not a proven fact.
Aug 20, 2019
0
#2430
If we can't even get some endgames right, how can we expect to get middlegames let alone openings right?
Prometheus_Fuschs wrote:
If we can't even get some endgames right, how can we expect to get middlegames let alone openings right?
Sometimes the shortest comments are the best. I think what you say makes a lot of sense.
Since I have joined here I have learned a lot about the game of chess. I've learned that a computer can only completely solve a chess problem if there are 7 or fewer pieces. I've learned some people would rather wait 4 minutes in a mate in one position than resign. I've learned that it's possible to win (by checkmate) even when your opponent has an easy one move mate. Probably the most important thing I've learned is that humans are horrible chess players, me being one of the most horrible. Maybe it's because I know how bad I am that I dont really believe it's possible for any human to play "perfect".
And today I learned something else. When Ponz says he would bet his life against a hundred dollars just because he believes the game of chess is a draw with "perfect" play (whatever that is) I realize he has extremely poor judgement, and I should probably take everything he says with a grain of salt.
http://plit-dekor.ru/files/photo/kazino-bao-casino-2019-obzor-igr-i-bonusov.html
Сейчас в онлайн-казино играет не просто много людей, а миллионы. Игроки привыкли проводить круто время и зарабатывать в онлайн-казино деньги. Вы можете проводить в игровых домах достаточно времени, зарабатывать деньги и наслаждаться игрой одновременно. В наши дни очень известны русские игровые клубы. В них играют ребята из разных государств, ЕС, США, Канады.
Очень известным игровым клубом считается online casino Casino-X. Если вам нужны автоматы с настоящими дилерами, вам важен крутой игровой интерфейс – вам сюда. Вы можете вести игру в любое время из любой точки стры в игровом клубе. Там собираются игроки, для которых важен помпезный дизайн, многофункциональный интерфейс, а также круглосуточная служба поддержки.
Среди популярных казино виртуальных надо также выделить и JoyCasino. На нём собираются мужчины, которые любят покер и рулетку.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2433
IMBacon wrote:
Tepeyac wrote:
I want to see everyone in this forum in the squared circle and everything goes! 😃
I remember when i had my first beer...
Me too. Ida Grove, Iowa, 1977. Pabst Blue Ribbon. Traveling with my grandmother and visiting some cousins. I'd had sips of my grandfather's beer (Oly) many times when I was very young. He died in 1974.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2434
Ziryab wrote:
IMBacon wrote:
Tepeyac wrote:
I want to see everyone in this forum in the squared circle and everything goes! 😃
I remember when i had my first beer...
Me too. Ida Grove, Iowa, 1977. Pabst Blue Ribbon. Traveling with my grandmother and visiting some cousins. I'd had sips of my grandfather's beer (Oly) many times when I was very young. He died in 1974.
What a coinkydink!
My aunt and uncle raised me, and the entire family were Oly drinkers. I was raised on beer, and allowed to have sips while my uncle and I watched football. I think this is partly why i never had that urge to drink when i got to high school. It wasn't anything new or "taboo" to me.
My drinking problem started much later in life.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2435
Optimissed wrote:
I raised my son in the same way. He probably had his first tiny drink of whisky when he was two, same as me, when he had a sore throat. I believe that such values may be illegal now in the UK, but just don't shout them from the rooftops.
The US has all these strict laws against drinking, and such, and also has some of, if not the highest rates of alcoholism, alcohol related deaths, illnesses in the world. Then you have countries like France, where children are raised on wine, and they have (or at least did years ago) some of the lowest alcohol related deaths, illness/problems in the world.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2436
Optimissed wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
This discussion about whether perfect play actually exists is a silly one, since the concept of perfect play is obviously an ideal. I accept that there will be people who don't understand what ideals are, however.
One doesn't need to go through endless lines of play to understand this. The question can be put differently. Since it's normally accepted that white has some small advantage which ideally diminishes as the game progresses, can white force a win in chess from the opening position?
Since I think that evidence suggests that only a fool would think that white can force a win against perfect play (that ideal!) by black, it is clear that only a fool will imagine that chess is not a draw with perfect play. The only thing preventing some people from understanding this is they don't appear to understand that "perfect play" is an ideal .... instead, they imagine that it must be represented by this or that line of moves.
So, are the people who are arguing this case trolling? It's certainly an incorrect argument, that we cannot know that chess is a draw because no win can be forced given correct play (drop the word "perfect") by either side. But people probably like the incorrect argument because they can't see a proof for the correct one. No imagination.
I'm a fool then. I dont know if either side can force a win from the beginning. But because I've never seen (or maybe understand) what ideal or perfect is, how could I not be a fool? Once I understand what perfect is, or see it at least, THEN maybe I'll understand that chess is a draw (or forced win) with ideal play. I've just never seen it so I cant rule out the possibility that one side has an advantage that can lead to a forced win.
If I had to guess, and it's only a guess, I think eventually white will have a forced win or at least a higher winning percentage.
Sh1t, I've called the woman I love a fool. Guess that makes me a fool. Wouldn't be the 1st time! But we're talking about a forced win for white from the starting position. I think it could be mathematically proven to be impossible, though.
As long as you involve the human element, things will never be perfect.
Opti, using words like fool, foolish or silly, do nothing to advance any argument. They are emotive words which prove nothing, whether directed toward people or used generically. People drive on different sides of the road in various countries for many reasons. What it really shows is that many viewpoints exist in human life on various issues. No one view is correct.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2438
Nwap111 wrote:
Opti, using words like fool, foolish or silly, do nothing to advance any argument. They are emotive words which prove nothing, whether directed toward people or used generically. People drive on different sides of the road in various countries for many reasons. What it really shows is that many viewpoints exist in human life on various issues. No one view is correct.
"No one view is correct."
Obviously you have never voted, or had a discussion on politics :-)
Aug 21, 2019
0
#2439
Optimissed wrote:
The proof consists of the fact that normally, in any well-played chess game, the advantage of the first move is gradually reduced. Obviously, either player can play a risky line, attempting to win by playing objectively bad moves, but there is no need to consider that. It has no bearing on the attempt to find a forced winning variation starting from move one.
Now, if a chess game is won, we have the opposite situation, in that the advantage of one side increases rather than diminishes. That is point two. The conclusion follows naturally from it.
The so-called "advantage" of having white is a dynamic advantage. Unless white does something with that advantage, it goes away.
The idea/proof that Optimissed is putting forth is one of several pieces of evidence which is in the minds of all very strong players. And one of the main reasons that the strongest players know/think chess is a draw with optimum play. But Optimissed has explained this idea very well and better than I have in the past.
There are several other reasons the strongest players know/think chess is a draw with correct play.
I agree that the word "correct" is a better term to use rather then "perfect" or "best".
None of them know, the believe so and so do I but there's a difference between knowing and believing.
With all things being equal. What result would you expect besides a draw?
Win for white or black?
How? If all things are equal?
But all things aren't equal...
If you meant chess then having to move first is a difference.
You match 2 exactly even opponents, with exactly the same amount of time, and with the exact same conditions for both players. What result would you expect?