Author: Alan McCracken
Date: 08:15:50 01/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2005 at 07:54:24, Uri Blass wrote: >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 Draw =/+ equal....that's it...no more.
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.