Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:54:24 01/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2005 at 05:43:30, Alan McCracken wrote: >On January 16, 2005 at 05:16:40, Mike Hood wrote: > >>On January 16, 2005 at 04:46:31, Alan McCracken wrote: >> >>>On January 16, 2005 at 04:21:27, Madhavan wrote: >>> >>>>On January 16, 2005 at 03:16:27, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>> >>>>>To solve a game is to prove the result with best play for both sides. It's a >>>>>term with precise meaning. >>>>> >>>>>Tic tac toe is solved (it's a draw). Connect Four is solved (it's a win for the >>>>>first player). Chess and Checkers are not solved. It is theoretically possible >>>>>to solve chess, you'd just have to do a very vey deep alpha-beta search. It is >>>>>not possible to consider doing this now, and probably won't be for the >>>>>foreseeable future. >>>>> >>>>>So what we are left to discuss is strength in practical play, which has nothing >>>>>to do with solving chess. >>>> >>>> >>>>playing the best move for both sides?what are you talking about? >>>>how can you determine which one is the best move to select? >>>>by running an infinite analysis and making a move?i would suggest you to play >>>>some correspondance chess over the net >>>>making the best move that can be made for both white and black may not end in >>>>draw,in some cases white will have advantage over black >>>>can you please post the game that has no slight errors on both sides >>>> >>>> >>>>>bruce >>> >>>If both White and Black choose "Best Moves" to _ALL_ moves, then the game will >>>end in a draw. However, if either White or Black play into a "Book" line which >>>either side may have inferior moves, then the result isn't proof that that the >>>game is _NOT_ a draw! White will win with the better lines or Black will win >>>with the better lines...it depends which side took the _Inferior_ route. IE >>>whoever makes a less than "Best Move" or at least "Best Move" relative to a >>>given opening and assuming the rest are "Best Moves" the side that made less >>>than the "Optimum" move will run the risk of lost. It's that simple. >>> >>>Best Moves _will_ result in a draw, no waffling. >>> >>>IGM;-) >> >>You can't prove your claim that playing the best moves for both sides will >>result in a draw. Not yet, anyway. In order to prove or disprove your statement >>chess has to be solved, which is many years away. In every given position with 5 >>pieces on the board, playing the best move will either lead to a draw, a win for >>white or a win for black. What will the result be of playing the best moves for >>32 pieces in the starting position? The material is equal, the positions are >>equal, but it's still not necessarily a draw. > >You don't have to solve chess to know it's a balanced position, and if kept >balanced has to end in a draw...how can it be otherwise? > >The first move may be worth 20-40 rating points at best, this is not enough for >White to FORCE a Win...and there is no way in hell Black has a forced win when >he's down a tempo. (The 20-40 rtg. pts.) > >It *IS* a DRAW! > >I'm a very experienced chess player and have understood for a long time, niether >side can force a win, mistakes must be made however slight. > >This is a FACT. > >Also chess has been demonstrated mathmatically to the best of my knowledge that >it's a draw. I do not know it. I strongly believe that chess is a draw but no proof for it is known and I see no way to prove it without solving the game. > >I'm sorry I don't have the source. > >But a draw it is, and if you were a master, you would know I'm correct. sorry but the level of the poster is irrelevant for the discussion. > >Look at the board at intial setup...it's clear through logical intuition and >induction it's a draw. intuition is not something that you are allowed to use in proofs. > >Have fun refuting what appears to be an abstuse axiom to you gents who want to >disagree with logic. People who think the "Perfect" game "Must" be played to >prove the obvious. Even something more obvious that white is not losing in chess was not proved. Even proving that white win in the following position was not done [D]1nb1kbn1/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR b - - 0 1 I am 100% sure that white is winning the diagram that I give but I have no proof for it. There is a difference between being sure of something and saying that it was proved. I may be even not sure in something that was proved in case that the proof is very long and there may be an error that I missed. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.