True or False Chess is a Draw with Best Play from Both Sides

I don’t recall. It may have been my iPad. The point, of course, is that 0.36 is inaccurate. The position is a dead draw with correct play. 0.00 would be accurate.

Anyone who knows how engines work would know such low evaluations only indicate advantage and not a winning position, this is especially true for an endgame. Whether it should evaluate with 0.00 a drawn position with "advantage" is a subjective decision.

There is no advantage in a simple textbook draw. It is your chess knowledge that is missing.

My limited knowledge of chess engines is built upon the thin data compiled through only a few years of near daily use since 1989.

Advantage is always the product of holes in anybody's chess understanding, the only true objective evaluations are winning, equal or losing positions.

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Que la virgencita lo protega

Technically, 0.36 is about a third of a pawn of an advantage, such advantage in virtually any endgame is meaningless.

When the computer sees a clear draw, the numbers are 0.00. That 0.36 is equal is another matter. In the diagram that I posted, the draw is clear, simple, and undeniable. Nonetheless, the engine running sans tablebases takes more than five seconds to reach that conclusion.

My point—simple and clear—don’t put all your stock in engine analysis. It will retard your chess development.

I’m done arguing this point with people who understand neither chess nor chess engines.

It is meaningless at any Stage of the game actually.

0.36 advantage in the opening is not meaningless to a very strong chess player. It improves practical chances.  

But of course don't put all your stock in an evaluation of 0.36 advantage by a chess engine.

About 4 years ago a grand master gave two positions [here on chess com] which the chess engines got wrong --because I am a human and can think out side the box--I solved both positions. 

The discussion the past two pages emanates from the position here, where Boguljubow missed a draw with 70...Kg4.

Here's a screenshot of Stockfish 10 not finding the true 0.00, and also showing evaluations while playing out the position. It was six moves before Stockfish showed 0.01 and ten until 0.00. 

Of course, it was pointed out quite accurately, that with tablebases, Stockfish sees this position correctly in an instant.

Actually it is.

Even professionals frequently choose to "spend" (so to speak) that small amount of "advantage" to get positions where they have better practical chances.

Only weak players think of 0.3 out of the opening as meaningful.

Of course, 0.3 could be good for white, but without seeing the position for context, 0.3 all by itself is meaningless. It could even offer black better chances in a real game.

@llamonade2 for instance, in the King’s Indian Defense, the computer favors White (sometimes by 2.00), even when Black’s attack is imminent. That’s one example, but there are many.

0.36 is literally 36 centipawns in an open position, what that means to you is not my concern but it's well known one pawn of advantage in rook endgames is most of the times irrelevant let alone a third of a pawn lol.

Opening evaluations by engines are quite useless even if correct (which most of times aren't), endgames may vary and OFC you need to interpret the result correctly.

LMAO, that's so wrong.

llamonade guy  your statement "that only weak players think of 0.30 out of the opening as meaningful." is not correct at all.  0.30 slight advantage is quite meaningful to me and I have won many games against strong players starting with that kind of an advantage and I am not a weak player. 

Practical chances mean something. Even having the first move advantage in chess means something as stats show. 

By the way it is rather well known that a computer with the aid of a strong human is better than just a computer alone.

Yes, practical advantages mean a lot, which is exactly why people ignore what the engine says in the opening.

Well, that and engines lack both the resources and design to play well in the opening in the first place.

That being said, obviously engines have changed the way players approach openings. Engine evaluations are important. But citing things like 0.3 in the opening is a nonstarter.

llamonade it is not really true that engines "lack the resources and design to play well in the opening, 

Just look at some of the games of Alpha Zero.  Alpha Zero plays the opening better than programmed chess Engines such as stock fish.  Alpha Zero was never "taught" or programmed with opening play.