Okay. I thought you were honestly serious.
If you were to graph a line of games ranging from idiocy to high-level, to the as-yet-unplayed, perfection, then yes, the graphed line would seem to indicate that perfect play results in a draw. But that's extrapolating.
@ponz-i used to be an admirer of Postal Chess player, John Penquite, who was rated at an phenomenal 2931USCF (+49=0-0) in 1992. Soo, i have to ask...did you ever run-up against him, and what happened?)
Wait many many years until we have a machine which can solve that.
I remember him and his high USCF rating. At the time there were 3 main postal chess organizations. Most of the top players went to APCT so I went there to try and play with the best players.
The problem with the old USCF was that one of their main tournaments was the Golden Knights where there were 3 rounds of 6 games each and you would have to win all 18 games over a period of years to do well.
I was able to find stronger players quicker in APCT and CCLA. I did have two game matches with a couple of players who had won the Golden Knights with 18 straight wins.
Yes, I wish I would have had the chance to play John Penquite!
Wikipedia says I was US Correspondence Champion.
Thanx for the thoughtful reply.
8)
Wikipedia says whatever someone wrote in the most recent edit. I could make you world champion there and then post here that's what it says.
(For the uninitiated, John Penquite@57, was an retired Mathematician who'd worked on computer vision systems and satellite data processing. Coming out of the Northwestern Postal Organization, he defeated long standing USCF APLT [4yrs] Champion James O'Brien in an 2 game match, to achieve such an meteoric rise in rating)
[Re: Chess Life November 1992 Vol. 47 No. 11]
Indeed, i am always in favor of "editing" Wiks if being an US Correspondence Champion is equal to an World Correspondence Champion! Cool.
Imo, some additions are needed - the article is a bit skimpy.
I remember him and his high USCF rating. At the time there were 3 main postal chess organizations. Most of the top players went to APCT so I went there to try and play with the best players.
The problem with the old USCF was that one of their main tournaments was the Golden Knights where there were 3 rounds of 6 games each and you would have to win all 18 games over a period of years to do well.
I was able to find stronger players quicker in APCT and CCLA. I did have two game matches with a couple of players who had won the Golden Knights with 18 straight wins.
Yes, I wish I would have had the chance to play John Penquite!
Wikipedia says I was US Correspondence Champion.
Hey ponz, I do not mean any disrespect when I ask this but I am curious. Why is your rating as low as it is? Being a champion I would think you would be at least above 2000
BMeck Which rating do you refer to? In the blitz chess it is not my rating as I do not play chess here except for vote chess and the one Ponziani Exhibition.
My son, played some games here and that is where the one rating came from. I did not know he was doing this until after it was done. He did win all his games but against low rated players.
BMeck to answer your question. I have a very old correspondence rating with USCF of 2300 plus. I played correspondence under ICCF International Correspondence Chess Federation. If you go to their main page I am not listed as active but my rating inactive is 2538. Looking at the current players we have #2 Daniel Fleetwood GM 2597
#3 Stephen Ham GM 2588
#13 Ken Reihart SIM 2464 all of whom I have played even after retirement.
My highest rating was 2550. The 2538 rating is relatively low as the powers at the time decided not to rate three USCCC preliminary sections which would have made my rating permanent [I needed 3 games and this would have been more than 20 games] and my rating would be about 2580 if those were counted. [ I understand the prelims are counted now.]
Aaaand we're off topic again. :) (Although, since I'm not posting anything relevant, I can't really complain.)
Sometimes someone asks a question and I respond even if it might be off topic.
But, of course, I already proved chess is a win for Black with best play. 
Er, no. You managed to express your strongly held opinion/belief quite effectively though. 
(I think he was joking, Ben)
But i must say, i am impressed by Ponz's achievements ( obviously checked his profile). But then, i'm still skeptical of his personal (and like- minded individuals) presumptive opinion that Chess is an draw with "best" play by both sides. Heh.
8)