I Who would win a perfect game of chess?

"Who would win a perfect game of chess?"
Nobody, they would both resign on move 0 and fall back to negotiations...
Can we come back to the topic, please?
Chess is unsolvable with traditional computers
You seem to be assuming some kind of "brute force" approach, where every possible move sequence is explicitly played out. But reasoning allows you to deal with large classes of positions all at once. For example, just knowing the remaining pieces - regardless of where they are on the board - is enough to tell you that certain endgame positions are a draw, or a win, etc. Maybe there's a way to classify midgame positions into a thousand or a million different cases, that allows chess to be solved. In that case, whether a computer can solve chess would depend on how smart its algorithm is.
Nobody, they would both resign on move 0 and fall back to negotiations...
I call this tactic "dressing up the straw-man"
If you'd said you can't checkmate an opponent in one move, that would be different.
You cant checkmate in one move.
Are you familiar with the chess term zugzwang?
Understood it but didn't know what is was named, thanks.
At present is simply unknown whether or not the starting position is a deep zugzwang for whoever moves first.
Your argument simply has no logical force whatsoever.
It could also be a deep zugzwang in favor of whoever moves second.

Want to reply to this thread?

"Who would win a perfect game of chess?" You must log in or register to reply here.

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Top Threads