What is dynamic equality?

I've always understood it as when your pawn-structure is terrible but your pieces are far better placed than your opponent to the extent that you're either ready to sacrifice them to create a mating attack, or they support a far advanced passed pawn and are threatening to create tactics to promote it. So in both cases the opponent will have to keep defending and defending, and if you slip up and allow them to secure king safety or take the passed pawn, they'll win because of the weaknesses in your pawn structure. And if they fail to defend their king or neutralise the past pawn, then you'll obviously win. So essentially all the static advantages favour the opponent, but they can't do anything about it because the moment their pieces venture out, all the tactics favour you. And so because it's dynamic equality, it means your opponent isn't concretely busted, and will eventually break out. So as they continue to defend, in the meantime you have to eliminate the weaknesses in your position, or place your remaining pieces in such a way that when your opponent eventually breaks out of the bind, your position is a lot better than before and are no longer losing an endgame.

Is that it or am I missing something else?

@1

"What is dynamic equality?" ++ It means that one side has a static advantage and the other side has a dynamic advantage and both cancel out leaving equality.

"I've always understood it as when your pawn-structure is terrible but your pieces are far better placed than your opponent" ++ Yes that is right.

"to the extent that you're either ready to sacrifice them to create a mating attack"
++ That would be a dynamic advantage

"they support a far advanced passed pawn and are threatening to create tactics to promote it."
++ That would be a static advantage.

"So in both cases the opponent will have to keep defending and defending, and if you slip up and allow them to secure king safety or take the passed pawn, they'll win because of the weaknesses in your pawn structure." ++ Yes, that is right.

"if they fail to defend their king or neutralise the past pawn, then you'll obviously win." ++ Yes.

"because it's dynamic equality, it means your opponent isn't concretely busted, and will eventually break out. So as they continue to defend, in the meantime you have to eliminate the weaknesses in your position, or place your remaining pieces in such a way that when your opponent eventually breaks out of the bind, your position is a lot better than before and are no longer losing an endgame." ++ Yes.

@2
"On the other hand "oo" (infinity sign)  implies dynamic equality, usually meaning the position is so complex that chances are probably even at least among human beings."
++ No. "oo" means the analyst is too lazy to determine if it is +-, =, or -+

"Pawns don't really play a bigger or smaller role in this."
++ They do. 'Pawns are the soul of chess' - Philidor
Every pawn is a queen to be.

@4
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Bxc6 dxc6 is considered equal.
White has a won pawn endgame, black has the 2 bishops.

@6
It is a won pawn endgame. If you do not understand that, no problem.
No reason to become rude.
In another thread you ask a question and then block any response.

@9
If you do not let me explain, then I cannot explain.
Here by the way is proof that the pawn endgame is won.
As said the bishop's pair offers dynamic equality.

@11
You seem stupid.
I said a pawn endgame, that is an endgame with only pawns and kings.
With all the pieces on the board it is a draw,
because the bishop's pair compensates for the pawn structure: dynamic equality.
The Kamsky-Carlsen game @7 shows that: Carlsen made good use of his dynamic counterchances, Kamsky erred and Carlsen won.

@13
In @3 I answered the original question @1 and corrected your erroneous reply @2.
You do not need to tell me what I should or should not.
As you are a weak player you should be glad I answer questions for free.

Thank you for copying and pasting my reddit thread into chess.com forums . The only reason why I found this is because I didn't get a good enough answer on reddit and was about to post it here onto chess.com forums and then saw you did it for me already. This is a hilarious coincidence lmao

And THIS is why I asked this question on reddit and not chess.com, because it's always a matter of time before various expletives like douchexbag and weak player get thrown in lmao. See what you started @gubankemo?

#18 I'm with you. He spends so much time belittling and insulting newer players who are only too happy to bend over backwards for him. He's had this coming for a while.

@20
I never belittle or insult, but for helping I get insulted by weak players:
"You are talking through your A55", "A55H0LE", "d0uchebag"
So the weaker players thank for help with insults.

@17
"I asked this question on reddit and not chess.com"
++ Reddit is more for computer questions.
Did you find my answer helpful?

tygxc, you are always the one in every beginner's forum thread telling everyone that they are weak, pathetic, don't know basic things like the value of pieces, etc... If everyone was like you, nobody would play chess.

@24
"telling everyone that they are weak, pathetic, don't know basic things like the value of pieces"
++ You must mistake me for somebody else. I never told anything like that.
I give good helpful advice without any charge.

Yeah, now your arrogance is starting to piss me off. Repeating the same three sentences over and over again is not "good, helpful advice". Not yo mention that you repeatedly sell this total lie that anyone can reach 1500 just by checking their moves before they play them. You really are a copper-plated toff. I suppose you see everyone below your rating as weak and inexperienced?

@26
If you do not want any good help for free, then pay a coach for it, or stay at 881 rating.
There is no need to piss me off or insult me as 'copper-plated toff'.

You have never provided meaningful support to anyone here. But that's probably due to the dizzying heights at 2081. Hope you're not suffering from vertigo up there, we wouldn't want you to come crashing down like a baby elephant falling on to its backside.

@30
I give good help to lower rated players but only get insults for it.
They apparently prefer to pay for advice.

The most important quality in a chess community is to be nice. You can't go wrong by being nice. If people are not nice then it becomes a massive d-swinging contest anytime there is a disagreement, for example I can call tygxc weak because I'm higher rated, tygxc can call you guys weak because he's higher rated, then someone else joins and calls me weak because they're higher rated, then Magnus Carlsen joins and calls everyone weak because he's higher rated. It's exhausting and boring.

I found tygxc's 1st post to be very helpful because it verified things I knew and gave me more confidence, and he is correct about the winning pawn endgame. I found ApawnMADEmeDOit's 1st post to be helpful because its a different perspective, and seeing things from the other side helps you grow.

Yeah, if only it was that easy... Arrogance has been an issue at all levels for a very long time, and I don't see it changing.