Originally posted by Marinkatomb Black can't have a forced win because however that win started, white can always start with a move that prevents it because white goes first.
Missed this before.
Logically, this is not true. White may be in zugzwang at the start of the game.
Nim (with six stacks) is an example of a game where the first player loses with best play. Chess is too complicated to analyse completely in the way that nim has been, but there's no reason to suppose it might be any different.
Basically what you are saying is the better chess player will win
no matter what sound opening is played and that is correct.
I have always wondered about the "chicken and egg" idea: Did the players I know become good, and then took up the Caro Kann, or did they take up the Caro Kann and then become good?
Originally posted by Paul Leggett I have always wondered about the "chicken and egg" idea: Did the players I know become good, and then took up the Caro Kann, or did they take up the Caro Kann and then become good?
For awhile, they took up the Caro because Bobby Fischer had trouble against it. 🙂
Originally posted by SwissGambit For awhile, they took up the Caro because Bobby Fischer had trouble against it. 🙂
I read an account where Tal picked up the C pawn and playfully taunted Bobby with it by placing it on temporarily on c6 without taking his hand from it and after observing Bobbys reaction pushed it forward to c5. 😀
Originally posted by Paul Leggett ... we could also argue the the starting position is a "strategic zugzwang" where white's first move, no matter what it is, involves a concession of some kin[d] that black can exploit .... I highly doubt that to be the case, but I can't disprove it at this point.
Is there any literature which considers this intriguing possibility of the starting position as a 'strategic zugzwang'?
Originally posted by Linden Lyons Is there any literature which considers this intriguing possibility of the starting position as a 'strategic zugzwang'?
John Nunn wrote in the introduction to one of his books that he thinks the game is a draw with best play, stating that he couldn't prove it but he believed it to be true. It's what prompted me to think about it.
We're just not yet at the point where we can tell.
Originally posted by Paul Leggett John Nunn wrote in the introduction to one of his books that he thinks the game is a draw with best play, stating that he couldn't prove it but he believed it to be true. It's what prompted me to think about it.
We're just not yet at the point where we can tell.
Whether or not Black has a theoretical draw in the initial position, it is probably worth believing. Otherwise Black might approach the game with a psychological disadvantage.
11 Mar '14 11:16
Is the Caro-Kann really "just rubbish"?
Back to Top