Optimissed Surely you are intelligent to know I never said that "chess is a draw given optimum moves but that no-one makes them,?"
I have given a whole lot of information that several or many players make optimum moves [moves without error]. This happens in the highest levels of correspondence chess that some players now play error free chess games.
So you're arguing that chess is a draw given optimum moves but that no-one makes them? @IfPatriotGames
You must be reading someone elses comment. I was commenting on Ponz's idea that people don't make mistakes (or computer for that matter). I was saying that as computers (and people) get better what used to be thought of as good or perfect is found to have flaws. That's why both players and computers are better now than they were 50 or 100 years ago. We learn from mistakes of the past.
There are probably games from 200 years ago that nobody could have possibly improved on. Now, those games are found to be full of mistakes. So what Ponz thinks of today as mistake free will be found 200 years from now to have all kinds of mistakes.
I've looked at many games from 200 years ago. The errors not only are obvious to my young students, but were pointed out in the magazines of the time.
Optimissed Surely you are intelligent to know I never said that "chess is a draw given optimum moves but that no-one makes them,?"
I have given a whole lot of information that several or many players make optimum moves [moves without error]. This happens in the highest levels of correspondence chess that some players now play error free chess games.
You sometimes miss the point you know, Ponz. My comment directly followed @IfPatriotGames' comment and I did refer to her. 
PATRIOT NO! You are wrong. There are players who play chess with no errors.
And you misquote me--I never said people don't make errors and I have commented many times that in chess it is very common for people to make errors In fact, in about 99% of chess games played there is at least one error.
What I am saying is that there are a few people who play chess now without errors.There may be a few games played 200 years ago which were without error, [I don't know?] But if they were without error--then for sure nobody could possibly do better.
If you are saying that there are games played 200 years ago and at the time chess analysis was poor then that could be true.
Your statement that what I think are a few mistake free games now and I will be disproven in the future [say 200 years in the future]=- and that all kinds of mistakes will be found--- you are simply wrong. If you were a stronger chess player--you would see this.
shuchita Yes, sometimes a draw is just luck as players under master level make many mistakes and who knows who will make the worse or last mistake[s]?
As for players at master level up to World Champion--there are also going to be mistakes made.
There is chess being played at higher levels than that. The stronger the chess players the less mistakes are made.
At the highest form of chess there can be very little number of mistakes. Some players at the highest levels of correspondence chess go for years without losing a game as they don't make mistakes.
They make mistakes. You just dont know it yet. Take the best correspondence games or players from right now and put them up against the best ones 200 years from now and you will see all the mistakes that are made. Of course it's possible that games of chess have been played with no mistakes. But nobody knows for sure if it's happened.
I was referring to your comment on Ponz's post. On the one hand you say that we can't know that chess is a draw with best play but also you seem to be saying that best play never occurs, or that's what I take what you wrote to mean. My assumption was that you're using the argument that perfect play never happens, which is contentious in itself, to support the idea that in practice .....
Alright then, I was being slightly sarcastic, I suppose. Lowest form of wit and all that.
Optimissed--guess I missed you were being sarcastic. People say weird things in these forums so please be careful with the sarcasm?
sorry
So you're arguing that chess is a draw given optimum moves but that no-one makes them? @IfPatriotGames
You must be reading someone elses comment. I was commenting on Ponz's idea that people don't make mistakes (or computer for that matter). I was saying that as computers (and people) get better what used to be thought of as good or perfect is found to have flaws. That's why both players and computers are better now than they were 50 or 100 years ago. We learn from mistakes of the past.
There are probably games from 200 years ago that nobody could have possibly improved on. Now, those games are found to be full of mistakes. So what Ponz thinks of today as mistake free will be found 200 years from now to have all kinds of mistakes.
I've looked at many games from 200 years ago. The errors not only are obvious to my young students, but were pointed out in the magazines of the time.
That's probably true for the vast majority of games at the time. I'm talking about games played then that were thought to be mistake free. Games that nobody could find any problems with, at the time.
Optimissed Surely you are intelligent to know I never said that "chess is a draw given optimum moves but that no-one makes them,?"
I have given a whole lot of information that several or many players make optimum moves [moves without error]. This happens in the highest levels of correspondence chess that some players now play error free chess games.
You sometimes miss the point you know, Ponz. My comment directly followed @IfPatriotGames' comment and I did refer to her.
I don't know why he does that. It's not the first time.
shuchita Yes, sometimes a draw is just luck as players under master level make many mistakes and who knows who will make the worse or last mistake[s]?
As for players at master level up to World Champion--there are also going to be mistakes made.
There is chess being played at higher levels than that. The stronger the chess players the less mistakes are made.
At the highest form of chess there can be very little number of mistakes. Some players at the highest levels of correspondence chess go for years without losing a game as they don't make mistakes.
They make mistakes. You just dont know it yet. Take the best correspondence games or players from right now and put them up against the best ones 200 years from now and you will see all the mistakes that are made. Of course it's possible that games of chess have been played with no mistakes. But nobody knows for sure if it's happened.
I was referring to your comment on Ponz's post. On the one hand you say that we can't know that chess is a draw with best play but also you seem to be saying that best play never occurs, or that's what I take what you wrote to mean. My assumption was that you're using the argument that perfect play never happens, which is contentious in itself, to support the idea that in practice .....
Alright then, I was being slightly sarcastic, I suppose. Lowest form of wit and all that.
I'm saying I have no idea if best play or perfect play ever happens. How could I? I'm saying that if it ever has happened, nobody would ever know because we have nothing to compare it to (perfection). I could say the perfect game of chess has already been played where white forced a win. Nobody made any mistakes, and white won. Or, I could say a perfect game has been played and it was a draw. Nobody made any mistakes and it was a draw. Either way, there is no way anyone could ever know. The ONLY way that's even possible is if chess has been perfected. We have reached the pinnacle where computers (or computers plus people) will never get better.
But I believe we are nowhere close to perfect I think both people and computers will get better. That's why I said 200 years from now it's likely the very best form of chess would absolutely crush the very best form of chess today. Which means, even THE very best form of chess today is full of mistakes. Even if Ponz doesn't want to believe it.
PATRIOT NO! You are wrong. There are players who play chess with no errors.
And you misquote me--I never said people don't make errors and I have commented many times that in chess it is very common for people to make errors In fact, in about 99% of chess games played there is at least one error.
What I am saying is that there are a few people who play chess now without errors.There may be a few games played 200 years ago which were without error, [I don't know?] But if they were without error--then for sure nobody could possibly do better.
If you are saying that there are games played 200 years ago and at the time chess analysis was poor then that could be true.
Your statement that what I think are a few mistake free games now and I will be disproven in the future [say 200 years in the future]=- and that all kinds of mistakes will be found--- you are simply wrong. If you were a stronger chess player--you would see this.
OK. So "There are people who play chess with no errors." and, somehow, at the same time "I never said people don't make errors"
At least you are keeping your options open.
PATRIOT yes! My statement stands. There are people who play chess with no errors. And also I never said people don't make errors.
There is no contradiction between those 2 statements--even if you think there is a contradiction.
There are at least two groups of players. 99% of chess players make a lot of errors. But there is a small percentage of chess players who no longer make errors.
OK, whatever makes sense to you I guess.
We`ve settled this: the answer is YES. Let`s move on, please!
I think that "mistook it 4a QR code" could be an abbreviation of "mistook it for a QR code"
I notice a joke in a Futurama episode where two robots sit down to play a game of chess. One of them immediately declares "Checkmate in 143 moves!" and the opponent responds "You always do that!"
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...)
This forum was created in 2013