#35
Every game ends before 6000 moves, but 10000 = 10^4 positions is a small number as compared to the number of relevant, sensible, legal positions involved in solving chess: about 10^19.
will chess ever die out once its fully solved?
Sort:
#41
Chess willl probably be solved before 80 years. It is just a matter of somebody wanting to put up some millions for modern computers and human assistants to solve it.
All 7 men positions already have been solved exactly. Nevertheless Nepo lost a table base drawn position in the classical world championship. This proves that humans will not be able to memorise the solution once it is found.
Dec 27, 2021
0
#24
Fuchuina wrote:
when we look at games they are made to be entertaining competitive fulled of fun, adventure, thrill and excitement giving chances to both sides but what would happen if the game was solved with everyone knowing who will win and how ends. this has happened with checkers and that game has died out completely with only a little bit of popularity from my observation but do you think the same will happen to chess once its solved as well?
No human can possibly remember every move that can be made. So who cares if computers solve chess?
well people said the same thing about checkers and that kind of died but the difference with chess is that its far more interesting and involves other complications and factors that it will still be fun to play even if it does get solved one day in the future, many might still play it
Dec 27, 2021
0
#26
Fuchuina wrote:
well people said the same thing about checkers and that kind of died but the difference with chess is that its far more interesting and involves other complications and factors that it will still be fun to play even if it does get solved one day in the future, many might still play it
Of course people will still play chess. Just like peopel still play checkers. Checkers is solved and people still play it. No human can possibly memorize every possible move.
blitz will always be fun since it involves short time, rapid i am not so sure unless 10 mins
IMKeto wrote:
Fuchuina wrote:
well people said the same thing about checkers and that kind of died but the difference with chess is that its far more interesting and involves other complications and factors that it will still be fun to play even if it does get solved one day in the future, many might still play it
Of course people will still play chess. Just like peopel still play checkers. Checkers is solved and people still play it. No human can possibly memorize every possible move.
yeah some people still play checkers but the game itself has died in popularity
CooloutAC wrote:
Fuchuina wrote:
blitz will always be fun since it involves short time, rapid i am not so sure unless 10 mins
I think we will eventually even see classical and rapid time controls shortened. Even Judy Polgar predicted this during the WCC.
i dont see that becoming possible unless a new governing body of chess appears
i can imagine a federation making bullet a format, that would be interesting
CooloutAC wrote:
Fuchuina wrote:
i can imagine a federation making bullet a format, that would be interesting
The only problem with bullet is it is not very fan friendly. And as Magnus pointed out in the WCC that its not that practical to play over the board. But I do feel that pieces flying onto the ground or players standing up over the board is kind of exciting lmao. Bullet online though is literally the most sporting by definition though, Even though personally its too hard for me to play or follow I have to admit that. Nepo said in the WCC press conference bullet is what he prefers to play online.
There is an OTB game of Nihal playing Firoujah in bullet. The faced off today but Nihal i think was feeling very pressured had a close endgame.
what about 2 mins or 1 min + 2 sec increment?
CooloutAC wrote:
Fuchuina wrote:
i can imagine a federation making bullet a format, that would be interesting
I'm the one incapable of having a debate? When you literally cry that you are afraid to have one? Then facetiously pretend to have one by just calling everything I say "factually incorrect" with no retort or rebuttal to prove it so? Yep, you're definitely a child and you don't even deserve a response. The world is reading your posts bud and they see you conceding.
what argument? i think your talking to the wrong person
Fuchuina wrote:
when we look at games they are made to be entertaining competitive fulled of fun, adventure, thrill and excitement giving chances to both sides but what would happen if the game was solved with everyone knowing who will win and how ends. this has happened with checkers and that game has died out completely with only a little bit of popularity from my observation but do you think the same will happen to chess once its solved as well?
Good thing about chess is that it's like the various types of Magic: The Gathering and the various types of poker (it won't be solved). Some say that chess was invented by the gods/goddesses in order to entertain themselves. I mean, wouldn't strong chess engines already have "solved" chess by now???
𝐴 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑦𝑒𝑠...𝐶ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑑𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔,, -𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒; 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒, 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑔 "𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑜𝑒" 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑔𝑜𝑜𝑑 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑!
"𝑃𝑙𝑠 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑚𝑒, 𝐼 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑜𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑡𝑜𝑙𝑑 𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑜!. (𝑀𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑒𝑚)
Dec 27, 2021
0
#35
Steven-ODonoghue wrote:
Coolout please limit your posts to a single strawman argument and I may take the time to respond - otherwise it just gets exhausting trying to correct all the lies you are making up to provoke me.
Yeah, it's like, if you want to troll, fine, but saying 100 ridiculous things in a single post has the opposite effect... people will just ignore you.
Dec 27, 2021
0
#36
My god, im a bit confused after reading all these post. First steven said muscle memory, etc does not exist, then he said they do, then he's saying no again....
Also i agree coolout, he is saying the same thing over and over again with no actual arguments, id suggest you just stop responding to his posts, he's not really helping the debate/argument
Also i agree coolout, he is saying the same thing over and over again with no actual arguments, id suggest you just stop responding to his posts, he's not really helping the debate/argument
Dec 27, 2021
0
#37
Also Steven please spare me from one of your horrible, repetitive and extremely annoying replies. Im going to die from exasperation if i have to read one of them again. Feel free to add me to your list of people who hate you/think you are annoying. Though im pretty sure they list has more than just 4people( including me and maybe coolout?)
Dec 27, 2021
0
#39
Well, players will become even better in the future. Not to the extent of computers, but still, the more chess is solved, the more perfect top humans will play as well. They will probably never be on the level of the engines, but there will probably be the moment, after chess is solved, when playing chess on the highest level will not be interesting, even though people can't really memorize this many potential games.
Casual players will be able to play it longer for sure. This will probably not happen in our lifetime however. People will either have to come up with even more complicated game - something like 12x12 chess with some other pieces to spice up the things, or for instance play something like 360 Chess. But it all depends on the wishes of those people in the future. Perhaps they will not be interested in a game like chess, so it just dies out in a 100 years for instance. We can only guess.
#33
10000 is a small number compared to the full solution of chess.
Already now the top grandmasters struggle to remember their 20+ moves of engine opening preparation.