🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <915@whuxlm.UUCP> whuxlm!dim (McCooey David I) writes:
>> >	1. Since there is no way we will ever be able to fully analyze
>> >	   chess, is it possible nonetheless to determine the PROBABILITY
>> >	   of BLACK having a forced win from the opening position?
>> >	   (The same goes for a forced DRAW or for a forced WHITE win.)
>	Another way to look at it is this:  Say we had an oracle that knew
>	the right answer (yes or no).  What would be "fair odds" for it
>	to give someone who did not know the answer?

I consider it virtually certain that chess is a draw under rational play:
Just look at the Karpov-Kasparov games!  (You want figures?  OK, I'd place
the probability of a win for White at about 1.0E-5, and for Black around
1.0E-9.)

I think this is a serious problem with the game.  Two extremely good
players will tend to have a string of drawn games until exhaustion takes
over to determine a winner.  A player who is leading in the last round of
a tournament can "play for a draw" to try to retain the lead.

This is not an unavoidable problem.  There are other games (I'm talking
two-player with perfect information) in which it is NOT POSSIBLE to have
a draw, e.g. the game of hex.  I think chess would be more interesting if
it were in this category.

Here's my question for the net.  How could chess be modified to reduce or
eliminate the drawn games, without presenting an unfair advantage to one
player?  (Thus no fair saying "draws are a win for black", etc.)

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!bentley!kwh), The Walking Lint