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

JimDiesel  in tic tac toe The player who moves first will have a  practical advantage sometimes vs another player.  I say "sometimes" as tic tac toe is so easy to solve --a lot of players never lose. But if you were able to look at the billions of tic tac toe games played--the player with the first move wins quite a bit more than the player who moves 2nd.

Eden, you are not telling the truth when you indicate I don't provide evidence. If you look through the more than 3000 posts you will see I have provided a lot of evidence that chess is a draw when neither side makes an error.

Of course chess has not been solved via math. And it likely never will be solved by math. I have always said that.  But what you are missing is that there are other ways to show chess is a draw. The accumulation of evidence shows chess is a draw. [I really doubt that you have looked at all the evidence]

I agree you don't understand why I brought checkers into the discussion and probably you never will understand this?

I am quite aware of the huge amount of possible moves in chess. This has been discussed many times in these forums. 

Your statement that there is zero evidence to back up my statement that chess is a draw is unbelievable and shows a rigid and closed mind.

Eden another thing you seem not to realize is that an opinion can also be a fact. In checkers the top players had an opinion that checkers was a draw with best play.  But it was also a fact. 

So, what you did was a motte and bailey. We were very clearly talking about an objective advantage not a practical advantage. If a chess position is a draw by best play, we give no advantage even if it's hard to draw for one side. If an engine finds M4, we don't say +10 just because it's hard to find.

I don't even believe that you believe what you say. He's the hundredth person to point out you're wrong and immediately he realizes you just repeat the same thing over and over again. If you really believed what you say, you'd be wiling to defend it in a forum where I can point out how you're wrong.

JimDiesel  you very well know why I will defend myself here instead of some other forum.

One of the reasons is you are not the only person who debates with me. [this should be obvious to you]

Another reason is I love to have your remarks here for all to see!

Another reason is you are really not an honest enough person for me to have a special debate with as you do not answer questions.  Again [for the 5th or 6th time?] I ask you to answer that simple question I asked of you some forum posts ago!!! 

coward

ha ha!   Who is the person who is a coward to answer a simple question??

no the person afraid to debate is a coward

PATRIOT  Just for your information. Please look at post #3371 and the sentence of JimDiesel starting with "Even the best engines win"  and I thought he posted"Even the best engines draw" and called him on it.

and you pointed out that in post #3371 he posted "Even the best engines win" and thus I made a mistake.  But I am first to admit when I make a mistake and gave an apology in post #3374.

Later thinking about it I realized that JimDiesel might have originally posted "draw" instead of "win" and if so I did not make the mistake that  I apologized for and JimDiesel was being a little shifty by not admitting he was wrong! [and changing the wording of his post]

To be sure I asked JimDiesel if he had gone back and changed the word "draw" to "win" and just did not tell what he did?  

JimDiesel did not answer my question?  Not only that I asked him about 7 times to answer the question and he refused to answer my question.

So it is rather evident that is exactly what JimDiesel did [change the word "draw" to the word "win"

and it was JimDiesel who made the mistake and now has avoided answering my question.!!![or admitting what he did!]

I think the playing level at ICCF (and CC in general) is overestimated by Ponz, although it is undoubtedly MUCH HIGHER than these stupid engine vs engine matches which many people use as a Gospel.

Right now I have started with 3/3 at the ICCF Lockdown Open Preliminaries Section 2, and two more easy points are on their way, so I will start with 5/5.

This is very, very far from claiming that "Chess is a Draw" - the claim is in all likelihood correct, but we have not reached anywhere close to a proof yet.

Depends on which elo of ICCF players you are talking about, according to dragonmist twitter, 

ICCF draw rate among top players ,

2500+ in the last 3 years is 97%-100%.

https://twitter.com/LeoLjubicic66/status/1289682018851262465/photo/1

pfren  I refer to the highest levels of ICCF correspondence.  For some reason ICCF started you with a very low rating [why did they do that??]  and you are getting weak competition.

To give an example of what I am posting about I refer you to the now completed tournament

MT-van Oosterom, Joop van Oosterom Memorial.  [wish I knew enough about computers to print it here?]

But draw rate in the highest form of chess is just part of my evidence.

[I would really appreciate it if anyone would post the cross table of that tournament Oosterom Memorial]

than these stupid engine vs engine matches (oh yeah ??..well if u played a injun ud certainly prove that chess wuznt a draw...grrr !)

Right now I have started with 3/3 at the ICCF Lockdown Open Preliminaries Section 2, (so ur using the silly system ?...lol !!) and two more easy points are on their way, so I will start with 5/5. (dont get too sure a urself there buster...they have age on u (tho most do)) 

i think its true, but cant white win because of its tempo?

62 yrs at a grandpatzers level (being generous). have u seen the game where AK makes NO known mistakes and GK wins in brilliant fashion ?....ur saying a mistake move is needed. and ur forgetting a brilliant move...oh nvm. 

JoeLovesCoco   For every day chess below super GM level White wins more than Black because of the practical advantage of the first move. But in the highest/strongest forms of chess where the players do not make mistakes--all games are drawn as the slight advantage of the first move is not enough to win vs the best competition.

he did say best, so does that mean brilliants to?

Ghostlady  I have never seen a game where one side won even though the opponent did not make a mistake.  

In trillions of games played--not one game has ever been shown where one side won   without his opponent making a mistake.

Joe no "best" in our context does not have to be "brilliant" "best" in our context means not making a mistake which would change the result of the game. 

For example in the position below  White can make a number of best moves without changing the theoretical outcome of the game. [which in this position White wins]