Single Comment

First move advantage in Western Chess - why does it exist?[Subject Thread] [Add Response]

H. G. Muller wrote on Fri, Aug 31, 2012 07:19 AM UTC:

Uh?

What I posted yesterday in response to Joe now shows up as a post of
George???

I think it only makes sense to talk about an advantage in the context of
fallible play. It is a well-kow problem that 'perfect play' from a drawn
position based oly on game-theoretical value of the positions is very poor
play, often not able to secure a win even against the most stupid fallible
opponent. E.g. take a position from the KBPPKB ending, which is drawn
because of unlike Bishops. Perfect play by the strong side will then
usually sacrifice its Bishop and two Pawns after some moves, being very
happy that KKB is still a theoretical draw. Good play distinguishes itslf
from perfect play in that you try to induce your opponent to make errors
(which is no longer possible in KKB, but quite easy in KBPPKB). This,
however, requires opponent modelling: you have to know which errors are
plausible. Otherwise you get silly play, where the stronger side tries to
trade all material as quickly as possible in a drawn situation (hastening
the draw), because he sees that after any trade the opponent has only one
move that doesn't lose, namely the recapture of the traded piece. This
would work quite well against a random mover, but most opponents are
stronger than that.