Will computers ever solve chess?

You are still quoting that old April Fool's joke posted by Chessbase.

Yes, it got me. i was wondering about the 1. e4  e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Be2 line as it looked terrible for White. 

oy

gambits are for developing. 

The problem with your idea is there are no trees at all which end up with White wins--so you would be wasting your time.

In the history of mankind and in the last 1000 years there never has been found a line where White wins from the opening position. This is because chess is a draw with optimum play.

There is mucho evidence that the game of chess is a draw with optimum play.

Indeed, History, and statistics, as has been said here by players more experienced and skilled than I, indicate that the game is a draw with best play by both sides. White historically recoeds more wins for white, because of the beast called the "initiative", which seems to consist in a "half" tempo, a small space advantage, as a small restriction on the availabilty of good moves by the non-holder of the initiative, not to say the confidence that the first player has in controlling somewhat the style and layout of the game.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if the second player had the right to refuse to accept the first move of the first player, so that they could blunt that advantage, whereupon the first player would then be allowed to make a second choice. I suspect that it would blunt the initiative to a small extent.

In that case, white could open with d4 and if it was rejected, he could open with Nf3 and transpose into the same opening, if he wants to play the London System, the Colle, the Queen's Gambit, etc.   

I just found out tonight that Aron Nimzovitch considered 1. e4 to be a blunder and that there actually is a refutation for it.  Black can actually force a win or a draw against 1. e4.   I'm keeping it to myself though.   This secret dies with me.      P.S.  Nimzovitch wasn't the one who busted it though, so don't bother looking for it in "My System".   

I was aware of the possibility of transpositions of that nature, but it does mean that White has to steer into them to get his favourite.

But my plan would still see White's Opening advantage have the edge taken off it a little, expecially if Black was hoping for 1 e4 and knew your secret.

As for the original question, will it make all that much difference when the great day comes when chess is solved.

But, the sales of Stockfish and Komodo will be a bit dented, I guess, and will knowing how to play 500 plies down the track help that much?

30 is usually plenty, and is a little over the limit a GM can store in his preparation.

bog, yes there are zillions of trees of White wins but there are zero trees of White wins by force from the opening position.

But as i have said many times the sun will explode and the earth will have no humans before chess can be "solved". It is just too complicated...

I like the information about raising chickens. That comes about as close to solving chess as almost everything else on this thread.

Well, maybe black can force his win. In this case, white would actually be in a zugzwang situation.

If infinite monkeys with typewriters can eventually reproduce Shakespeare, perhaps infinite chickens might do the same for a chess solution?  Don't hold your breath.

Ponz is much more convincing than you were, when you expressed the following self-contradictory belief:

I cannot prove this 100%. But can beyond a reasonable doubt.

This can be done by pointing out the evidence that chess is a draw with optimum play. 

Interesting. Quoting an actual post is now "revisionary."

Ponz' argument is based on the millions of games played to date, thousands of GMs searching for that magical line where White wins and concluding that chess is a draw with best play, and now millions of computer games that demonstrate White had no winning advantage from the first move.

I understand that makes chess a depressing game. The only way anyone ever wins is if their opponent makes a fairly sizable error.

I've no idea what the above quote means, but I thought it worth saving for posterity.