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

It´s a very high percentage of draws.

Yes, it's a very high percentage of draws. But I'm talking about the advantage, if any, that one side has over the other especially at very high ratings, because that's likely where the best chess is played. It seems to me that 20 wins for white vs. 6 wins for black is a very high win percentage for white, certainly more than the historical 55%. Wikipedia has sources that explain the advantage white has is almost zero at the beginner level, but as ratings to up, the percentage of white wins goes up too. 

I cant help but wonder if this trend continues what that means for determining if white can ever force a win from the beginning. For example what if 50 years from now the highest level chess reveals that 99% of all games are draws, .9% are wins for white, and .1% are wins for black.  So the advantage of white becomes extreme. Then say 100 years from now 99.5% of all high level games are draws, .5% are wins for white, and zero black wins. Wouldn't that mean there is still the possibility that white can force a win because black has zero chance?

pinkblue    I was referring to modern correspondence chess which at the top levels produces games far better than grand master games. In that situation as the ratings or ability goes up there are more and more draws with White, 

There is also a difference in comparimg stats You can say for example that a White win rate of 5% is much better than a Black win rate of 2% but in reality both are rather low.. 

Also you need to know when  two very strong computers play each other such as stockfish vs Lela sometimes they are forced to play certain openings sol this completely skews the results. For instance both stockfish and Lela were compelled to play this defense in the Center Counter  1. e4  d5 2. exd5 Qxd5  3. Nc3  Qd6 as Black. In both games White won because of the opening.

Patriot in the match Alpha Zero vs Stockfish--Alpha Zero was the far stronger computer. 

If 50 years from now the highest levels of chess show 99% draws--this would be another indication  that chess is a draw. Even if ,9% are wins for White and only .1% are wins for Black--this does nolt mean our indicate that the game of chess is a win for White. However your possible senario will not happen as there are some new developments in  the highest form of chess.

By the way there are some very new developments in  the highest form of chess--a kind of correspondence chess which is resulting in  all draws when two equal chess powers [higest chess powers] play each other. 

I was looking at some of the statistics from the world correspondence chess championship. Historically the percentage of white wins is about one and a half to three times as much as black. But recently, in the last 10 years or so, some years have the ratio of white wins over black has gone up considerably. Draws are increasing, but in the games that are not draws, even in correspondence chess the advantage for white is increasing. 

I just thought it was weird that you would say this when the opposite is true. I realize the percentage of draws is going up. But I was talking about the percentage of wins for each color of games that are not draws. 

Sometimes mirrors look like windows, but they are not.

ok boomer

Patriot  In Correspondence chess as the combination of players with computers becomes stronger the percentage of White wins goes down.  It may be that the percentage of Black wins does not go down as much as the percentage of White wins but I am just referring to the percentage of White wins out of all the games and that includes the very many draws.  You cannot really exclude the vast majority of the games in this [which are draws]  If you meant to just compare the percentages of White wins and the percentage of Black wins--both go down.

One other new development just recently there has been progress so that virtually all the games are drawn which means both the percentage of White wins goes down [to zero] and the percentage of Black wins also goes down [to zero]

I used to think that chess was a draw because of perpetual checks, and insufficient material issues. But watching Magnus Carlsen play, I am starting to think that there could be forced win lines that always create favorable end-games (either extra past pawns, or piece sacrifices). (Of course this would be tracking trillions and trillions of possibilities).

Storing all legal chess board positions might take more atoms than we have on Earth, so we will have to wait for Intergalactic Cloud Computing to find out : )

Ifuentealbadeotnet.  The definition we are using for a perfect game is any qame where neither side makes a mistake which would change the outcome of the game. 

So in the vast majority of positions there can be many perfect moves. Also it is far easier to find perfect moves [by our definition] than you realize.

Also the value of  bishop and/or a knight varies with the position.  Even in the starting position neither the bishop or the knight is worth exactly 3.00 points.

It is true that humans usually cannot see 30 moves ahead [sometimes they can] but that skill is not needed at all to determine perfect moves in  a position.

It is true that after 1, e4  then 1.  ... e5 is a good response but also 1. ... c5  is a very good response.

Also if you open 1. e4  and your opponent responds with  c5  then playing 2. e5?  is a rather bad move and violates opening principals.

Yes, I realize you are considering ALL results when figuring the percentage of white and black wins. But I notice a trend among very high rated games. The percentage of draws goes up, and the games that are not draws the percentage of white wins goes up too. By quite a bit. So the trend is that black probably does not have a forced win. I also notice you said "virtually" instead of "literally". 

My guess is that if one side has a forced win, it's probably going to be an incredibly small number of ways to do it, compared to overall possibility of games. So "virtually" still leaves room for many, many quadrillions of games and possibilities where one side could force a win. 

woah how long are these paragraphs

PATRIOT  There was a ton of evidence that chess is a draw. 

And now there is new compelling evidence in addition to the ton of evidence already shown.

Also  this very new evidence  shows White wins and Black wins are zero. with this new way  of playing Centaur Chess [correspondence chess] 

I myself used to play correspondence chess at a high level but this new information is so compelling that I think it will eventually be the END OF CORRESPONDENCE CHESS [at least at a high level] as all potential players will know that their opponent can force a draw even  if that opponent is not very good at chess!!!!

So 100% of games played at that level are draws? If so, how many in a row has it been?

I think that just about sums up how this forum thinks.

my sentiment as well and i contend this is the best we can say right now. anything more and it's assuming.

***
Note the topic has the title "true or false.....?" It's not "say what you think is the case and I will ram into your skull it is true".

https://www.chess.com/club/the-video-gamers-club/join

From what move number?