Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Read What KK Had to Say

Author: chandler yergin

Date: 00:56:43 05/22/05

Go up one level in this thread


On May 21, 2005 at 21:06:21, Terry McCracken wrote:

>On May 21, 2005 at 13:10:11, chandler yergin wrote:
>
>>On May 21, 2005 at 03:41:19, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>
>>>On May 21, 2005 at 03:13:00, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 20:42:14, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 19:50:00, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 18:42:57, Daniel Pineo wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 03:45:37, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 03:21:34, jefkaan wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On May 19, 2005 at 14:01:43, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>He certainly knows something of opening theory. He's a little passed 1.e4:o)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>that's fine in a anti-computer style.
>>>>>>>>>but fundamentally 1.e4 is the best.
>>>>>>>>>it might be a solution of chess.
>>>>>>>>>but we wont know this of course until
>>>>>>>>>the year 3000 or so(*)
>>>>>>>>>best regards
>>>>>>>>>jef
>>>>>>>>>(*)yes chess also might be a draw; we don't know yet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I do...it's a draw, and the proof is all around you in the chess world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes Terry, again assertions, no Proof.
>>>>>>How little you know.
>>>>>>Proving once again.. you don't know!
>>>>>>The 'evidence' is against your position!
>>>>>>The facts are against your position!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Based on 1,114,334 Games
>>>>>>1-0   413,652 games  = 34%
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1/2 1/2 381,463 games or 35%
>>>>>>
>>>>>>0-1 318,393 Games  or 28%
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You have NO argument or point!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And what might that proof be?
>>>>>
>>>>>I gave antidotal evidence, ie, one pawn up is 99% of the time a draw, there is
>>>>>statistical evidence that chess is a draw...number wins losses and draws...etc.
>>>>>
>>>>>No way in hell can the first half move win...it's value falls with every
>>>>>consective move played thereafter, barring any errors.
>>>>>
>>>>>Tell me Chan, do you know any GM's that would say chess isn't a draw?
>>>>
>>>>Yes, probably most of them.
>>>
>>>No, you wouldn't.
>>>
>>>>As long as there is the human element, a battle of wills and ideas, the game
>>>>will continue to be Wins, Losses & Draws. Three possible outcomes, the
>>>>Percentages are yet to be determined.
>>>
>>>We have a broad database on that. Karpov was pleased with the level of chess
>>>today and the increasing level of draws.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Besides, you beleive it to be a draw so what's your damn problem?!
>>>>
>>>>No, I don't believe it can be proven now or ever.
>>>
>>>
>>>Don't be so certain.
>>>
>>>>The player that moves first has an advantage.
>>>
>>>Very small...it's worth at best 20 rating points.
>>>It drops rapidly, after ten moves it is hardly apparent.
>>>
>>>>Whether this initiative can be nullified with perfect play can not be
>>>>determined. Nor can perfect play ever be determined.
>>>
>>>Yeah, I've heard this how many times now? Too many!
>>>
>>>>You can speculate that with 'perfect' play on both sides it should be.
>>>>That does not make it so. This is not Tic tac toe.
>>>
>>>Really? As if I hadn't noticed...and it's not relevent.
>>>
>>>>We can only list the millions of game that have been played since Chess
>>>>was invented as a game, & review the results.
>>>>We have done that.
>>>
>>>Yes, and it favours the draw Chan.
>>>
>>>Now for KK.
>>>
>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?427154
>>>
>>>There is a way to statistically prove it which is not a mathematical proof of
>>>course.
>>
>>What do you consider Statistics are if not mathmatical?
>>Hmmm?
>>
>There's is a big difference between a mathmatical proof and statistics!
>
>> What you do is look at results of matches between players of equal
>>>caliber . You look at different calibers(ie:rating).You then measure the draw
>>>results. You can also do it with different time control matches as well. If the
>>>% of draws goes up constantly all the way to the top ratings, and if your sample
>>>sizes are large enough then statistics would point to whether with perfect play
>>>chess is a draw or not.
>>
>>No it won't.
>>
>>You cannot get a significant Sample Size!
>> Your Basic Premise is wrong!
>>
>>
>> You would be hard pressed to find any GM who thinks
>>>chess is a win for white.
>>>KK
>>
>> The Statistics speak for itself.
>>
>>Based on 1,114,334 Games
>>1-0   413,652 games  = 34%
>>1/2 1/2 381,463 games or 35%
>>0-1 318,393 Games  or 28%
>>These are Rated Games from the Total played.
>>
>>As long as Chess is played between humans there are only 3 possible outcomes
>>Win Loss or Draw.
>>
>>There will always be a percentage of Draws among the Top Players.
>>So what?
>>It will never approach a significant Percentile.
>>White always has the advantage.
>
>Not enough of an advantage to win, you know that or at least you should know
>that.
>
>Let's leave it at that.

Fine, then stop 'asserting' Chess is a Draw!
It's foolish!



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.