[FOM] Checkers is a draw
joeshipman@aol.com
joeshipman at aol.com
Thu Jul 26 11:30:09 EDT 2007
I have a master's rating, and I own several Grandmaster-level chess
engines. I rarely beat them when playing "straight", but I find it
quite easy to beat any of them when I am allowed to use the "move
takeback" option repeatedly.
The point of this observation of mine is that the gap between "perfect
play" and the strongest Grandmasters can't be more than a few hundred
rating points (they would occasionally draw a "straight" game against a
perfect player), so it seems to me that with backtracking they would be
able to satisfy themselves that Chess was a draw in the same way that I
can satisfy myself about exactly how strong a chess engine I am playing
is. Unfortunately, this is not the kind of certainty that can be
communicated easily to someone who does not have a highly sophisticated
intuitive understanding of chess.
The "moral certainty" is of the same type that a lesser chessplayer can
have about an easier proposition, for example the proposition "if you
remove White's Queen Knight from the initial position, then Black has a
forced win." There is no hope of a mathematical proof of this
mathematical fact, but I claim that a good enough chessplayer's
conviction about this qualifies as actual "knowledge" (justified true
belief).
-- JS
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Wolf <robertswolf at yahoo.com>
To: Foundations of Mathematics <fom at cs.nyu.edu>
Sent: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:35 pm
Subject: Re: [FOM] Checkers is a draw
I don't understand, or perhaps more frankly I
don't believe, your statement that "I can very easily
and quickly find a way to beat them if I am allowed to
backtrack and they are committed to playing the same
move when they get the same position." Would you
please explain/justify this claim? Thanks.
Bob Wolf
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.
More information about the FOM
mailing list