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

that is funny!

summa the new QR's are circles now...kinda cool ! i saw them at the hotel this weakened. e.g....(dont know where this one takes u...)

Neither true nor false. The answer is nobody knows yet.

kelli203   What you seem not to realize is that something can be true without anybody knowing it?

For example for millions of years planets existed outside of our own Solar System without anybody knowing this,  

u may be getting over ur head there. depends on wutchu know abt philosophy & consciousness.

i think....uhh, i think were abt to find some stuff out...yee ! coming dn the rabbit hole w/ me ??

Yes. And lets not forget that something can also be false without anyone knowing it. It could be chess is a forced win, but nobody knows it yet. So her statement is true, nobody knows yet. BELIEVING it's true or false doesn't cut it. You have to be able to prove it. And it will be a very long time before anyone proves it either way.

PATRIOT  Just because you say or she says that nobody knows something--does not mean you are correct. I know chess is a draw.when neither side makes an error. Magnus knows chess is a draw when neither side makes an error. Almost every top player know chess is a draw when neither side makes an error,.

You are not being honest to pretend you know what I know or don't know. You cannot read my mind. Even if you could read my mind it would not help as you do not have the chess knowledge to understand what I know? You do not have the chess knowledge to understand what Magnus knows about chess. 

You are very closed minded. You seem to believe that the ONLY way one can know chess is a draw is per math which we do not have now and may never have?  You are so closed minded that you disregard the ton of evidence that chess is a draw when neither side makes a mistake.

I know chess is a draw.

okay. I can at least draw ANY tic tac toe player on this launched stone. so maybe chess will prove to be that too. that theory will merge w/ practice and we'll find that all games can be forced to at least a draw (if not a win). but losings no more.

It doesn't mean  you are correct either. It's a two way street. I dont have to read your mind to know you don't know. Nobody knows. You are included in that group. You are not an exception. You believe you know the eventual outcome, but that's all it is. A belief. I (and others) are honest enough to say we don't know. Some day we might, but not today. 

When you say chess is a draw even though it's not proven you could be right. But you could also be wrong. The person who knows chess is a forced win even though it's not proven yet is just as right as you are. That's the thing about beliefs, they can be very stubborn. 

PATRIOT  Again you seem to misquote me. Look at this sentence: "When you say chess is a draw even though  it is not proven you could be right. "

This is a misquote as I don 't say chess is a draw even though it is not proven.

It Has been proven over and over again by a whole lot of evidence!

You are so closed minded that you often misquote me.

Well if you are so sure, then prove it. Since chess is just a mathematical collection of possibilities, prove that it's IMPOSSIBLE for one side to force a win. You haven't done it, and neither has anyone else. But who knows, maybe 100 or 200 years from now something will. 

PATRIOT  I HAVE proven chess is a draw when neither side makes an error. 

You are so closed minded that you disregard the evidence. [also you probably don 't  understand  much of the evidence.]   

Of course I cannot prove it by math and it is something that may never be proven by math.

But there are other ways to prove chess is a draw.  And I have given a ton of evidence that chess is a draw. It is NOT a coincidence that virtually every strong player knows chess is a draw.  Just as it was not, a coincidence that virtually every strong checker player knew checkers was a draw, They knew this for decades before it was math proven.

Then why aren't you famous? Why isn't your name in Wikipedia as having proven chess is a draw? If chess is a math problem, meaning all possibilities (win, lose, or draw) can be displayed mathematically, then prove it. Don't you have to use math to solve a math problem?

I dont think it makes much sense to compare chess to checkers as far as solving because in chess there is a well known first move advantage. In checkers there isn't. Moving first in checkers is like moving first in tic tac toe. 

Isn't checkers solved?

Yes. So is tic tac toe. Both do not have a first move advantage. Chess does have a first move advantage. Which is why it's more difficult to figure out if that first move advantage can ever transform into a forced win. 

PATRIOT  You are incorrect both checkers and tic tac toe have a practical first move advantage. If you were able to look at the trillions of games played you would see this. 

My name is in  Wikipedia for chess--just not for something impossible at this time.

And you are simply closed minded to insist that chess must be proved by math. Chess is far too complicated to be proven a draw using math.

However I Have proven chess is a draw by giving a ton of evidence.

Then why do some expert checkers players say going first can be a DISADVANTAGE? It would be hard to find someone who says going first in chess is a disadvantage. It's now well known that going first in chess is an advantage. 

If chess is just mathematical possibilities, then why not prove it by using math? The problem is too big? Yes. That's why neither you, nor anyone else, has proven it to be a draw or forced win. Neither are provable at this point.

Evidence just suggests an outcome. It's not proof. There have been plenty of times in human history evidence suggested one thing, but eventually was proven otherwise. 

There are plenty of logical people on chess.com.  The two arguing here are not examples of those .

Ponz has not proven chess is a draw, never has, never will.  But he'll shuffle off this mortal coil still fighting about it.

Tic tac toe has an incredibly obvious and easily demonstrable first move advantage.  If you move first and correctly in tic tac toe, the opponent must respond perfectly every time or lose outright. 

I pick center...you did not respond with a corner?  You lost.

I pick center, you pick a corner, I pick the corner opposite...you did not pick one of the other corners?  You lost.

I pick corner, you pick center, I pick the opposite corner...you picked another corner?  You lost.

The same is not true in reverse...the first player has one move of breathing room throughout the game, and is never in any real danger at all.

There are few well known games on the planet with a bigger first move advantage.  In fact, Connect Four wouldn't even exist if it were not to combat the massive first move advantage of Tic Tac Toe on a 3x3 grid and make a more playable game out of it.

Checkers is only solved because the number of positions that had to be traversed was 10^14, not 10^46.7 like chess.

That makes chess 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times harder to solve.  For you Moore's Law people that haven't been told Moore's Law is already breaking down yet...good luck on that one .

There are plenty of logical people on chess.com. 

if u say so.