(cache) ghostmeatloafがIs Chess really that infinite?について記入したコメント

Title	Description
Physics	Theoretical Physics, Experimental Physics, High-energy Physics, Solid-State Physics, Fluid Dynamics, Relativity, Quantum Physics, Plasma Physics
Mathematics	Mathematics, Statistics, Number Theory, Calculus, Algebra
Astronomy	Astronomy, Astrophysics, Cosmology, Planetary Formation
Computing	Computing, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Computability
Earth and Planetary Sciences	Earth Science, Atmospheric Science, Oceanography, Geology
Engineering	Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Structural Engineering, Computer Engineering, Aerospace Engineering
Chemistry	Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, Polymers, Biochemistry
Social Sciences	Social Science, Political Science, Economics, Archaeology, Anthropology, Linguistics
Biology	Biology, Evolution, Morphology, Ecology, Synthetic Biology, Microbiology, Cellular Biology, Molecular Biology
Psychology	Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, Developmental Psychology, Abnormal, Social Psychology
Medicine	Medicine, Oncology, Dentistry, Physiology, Epidemiology, Infectious Disease, Pharmacy
Neuroscience	Neuroscience, Neurology, Neurochemistry, Cognitive Neuroscience

Date	Description
23 Jan	FAQ Friday
28 Jan	Ask Anything Wednesday - Biology, Chemistry, Neuroscience, Medicine, Psychology

1681

1682

1683

MathematicsIs Chess really that infinite? (self.askscience)

DoctorZMC が 10 時間前投稿

あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]ghostmeatloaf 12 ポイント13 ポイント14 ポイント 2 時間前 (17子コメント)

[+]oisdjflksdklfns スコアが基準値未満のコメント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント-7 ポイント 1 時間前 (16子コメント)

[–]ghostmeatloaf 8 ポイント9 ポイント10 ポイント 1 時間前* (15子コメント)

We are not talking about threefold repetition or 50 moves, those draws are optional, we are talking about an empty board with two kings, ie, insufficient material.

From you own link, which you did not read.

A stalemate is an automatic draw, as is a draw because of insufficient material to checkmate. A draw by threefold repetition or the fifty-move rule may be claimed by one of the players with the arbiter (normally using his score sheet), and claiming it is optional.

Here's OP's full comment in case he edits / deletes it due to getting blown the fuck out:

"No, you are incorrect. It's a common misconception that draws are automatic. The rule is that after threefold repetition or no capture/pawn move in the last 50 moves, either player may request a draw. It is completely optional.

A game in which neither player opt to request a draw and instead continue a cycle is completely legal. I suggest you read up on the rules of chess before offering further game opinions."

Emphasis mine, because lol.

[+]oisdjflksdklfns スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 1 時間前* (14子コメント)

It seems you're having trouble parsing the language there. I'll help you out, and explain your confusion despite your rude tone.

A stalemate is an automatic draw

Stalemate is a technical term for the specific situation in which a player must move but has no legal moves. It is the ONLY situation in which a draw is forced.

as is a draw because of insufficient material to checkmate. A draw by threefold repetition or the fifty-move rule may be claimed by one of the players with the arbiter (normally using his score sheet), and claiming it is optional

A player may claim insufficient material to checkmate. There are two ways to claim this: The threefold rule or the fifty-move rule. Or they may chose not to claim it. It is optional.

Does that help clear up your misunderstanding? If you wish to continue this conversation you'll have to learn to be more civil.

[–]ghostmeatloaf 11 ポイント12 ポイント13 ポイント 1 時間前 (8子コメント)

A player may claim insufficient material to checkmate. Or they may not. It is optional.

Remember back when I told you that you didn't read your own link? You should have probably read the link after that. Because the quoted statement is patently, and very simply, false.

I'll quote it again, so you can read it again.

"A stalemate is an automatic draw, as is a draw because of insufficient material to checkmate."

Again, that's

"A stalemate is an AUTOMATIC DRAW, AS IS a draw BECAUSE OF INSUFFICIENT MATERIAL TO CHECKMATE."

And in case that isn't clear enough, or you don't believe Wikipedia, he's a link to the Word Chess Federation's Law's of Chess: http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article

If the position is such that neither player can possibly checkmate, the game is drawn.

"The game is drawn." in this context doesn't mean "the two sides are equal according to game theory and neither side can possibly win." (even though that's true), it means the game is over and the result is 1/2 - 1/2.

Here's another link because why not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#Draws

The game is immediately drawn when there is no possibility of checkmate for either side with any series of legal moves.

And don't gripe at me about tone now, you started the sass back with your reply to my first comment. "I suggest you read up on the rules of chess before offering further game opinions."

[–]oisdjflksdklfns -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 1 時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]ghostmeatloaf 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]oisdjflksdklfns -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 1 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]ghostmeatloaf 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 54 分前* (0子コメント)

I don't believe you.

I believe me, and that's enough for me. :0)

Your complaint is that an infinitely long game of chess is boring? That's what you take issue with?

Yes, and

No, this isn't a given at all. Many games are finite.

Obvious and boring. It's not a point worth making in the context of OP's question: "As there are many legal moves in a game of chess but often only a small set that are logical, is there a way to determine how many of these games are probable?"

If you choose to ignore threefold repetition draws, which in a real game of chess, is very illogical, two players could create enough space to move their queens back and forth 1 square forever after a small handful of moves, thus creating a very boring infinite sequence.

Threefold repetition exists specifically to prevent these scenarios, and infinite games. Yes, obviously both players could choose to ignore a very key and important rule of the game, but under the context of trying to score as high as possible in a tournament, which is what the "bonus question" pertains to, players are not going to ignore threefold draws. Threefold repetition is not an automatic draw according to the rules, but it is the only reasonable ending to certain games by logical and reasonable players.

It feels like you're just trying to lob lazy, pedantic points in order to draw this out spitefully though, so this is all I have to say and won't reply to anything further.

[–]xlptu 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]oisdjflksdklfns 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]WikiWantsYourPics 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 57 分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Pzychotix 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 54 分前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 4328 on app-186 at 2015-01-22 21:33:09.314692+00:00 running 151f585 country code: JP.

askscience

Please read our guidelines and FAQ before posting

Features

Filter by Field

Calendar

Related subreddits

調停者