On Reaching Draw Death in Chess
With most of the top games in chess ending in draws, people, companies, and players lose sight of why one should even bother playing chess. In my opinion, chess should be played because of its artistic value, not its mysterious value.
My first point is that chess, being ultra-weakly solved as a draw is the best result that can be reached. “Draughts” or “Checkers” as Americans would say, was weakly solved in 2007 by Jonathan Schaeffer and the computer Chinook. The result found was that regardless of who moved first in Draughts with proper play the game ended with a draw. ‘Ultra-weakly solved’ simply means to prove whether the starting position in a game is a win, draw, or loss for the first player. ‘Weakly solved’ means to have an algorithm or program that secures the ultra-weakly solved result for the first player in a game. So, why is chess being a draw the best result? It has to do with the way openings are played.
In current times it is believed that white has a slight advantage and is the one playing for the win whereas black is just playing to equalise the game and if a win is available to take it. Some openings like the ‘Nimzo-Larsen Attack’ are generally not played at the top levels because with best play all white gets is a draw. As a result, top players deviate to playing things like the ‘Queen’s Gambit’ because it is believed that white still retains the opening advantage. If chess ends with a draw, with proper play, then this opening consideration becomes irrelevant, and players can play whatever openings they love most; except for those that lose by force like the ‘Latvian Gambit’. If chess were found to be a win for the first player then the opening options become heavily restricted and players will deviate to playing only one set. Thus, chess being a draw actually gives players free will on the first move to play whatever they desire, any other result takes away this freedom making the game deterministic in nature. One might now be wondering that if chess is a draw, then what are the players playing for?
This brings me to my second point. Chess should not be played for the result but the artistic flare; in the same way a painter paints a painting to express identity, ideas, and or interpretations rather than to paint a perfect painting. Unlike the conclusion of G. K. Chesterton’s essay, “The Perfect Game”, in which Chesterton simply says that “once one can play a game unerringly, the game becomes uninteresting; one should realise that it is the art and beauty of something that makes it interesting, not its mysterious value”. For example, a large field in chess is the field of chess compositions, in which composers create chess problems with a theme or pattern, often positions that would never naturally occur in a real game. A chess engine like “Stockfish” can solve these compositions correctly in seconds, or not at all! Despite that the solvers still love to solve them, they often already know the result of the composition is a win or some clever draw, and yet solvers and the like fall in love with solving them. This is because artistic beauty is what made the game interesting not necessarily the mystery of who won. Even after a solver finds the solution to a composition, they will often spend hours just looking at the placement of the pieces appreciating the vision of the composer.
The same thing can be said about the game itself. There are more chess games than anyone could ever see. In other words, no man or machine will be able to see all the possible chess games being played throughout all time. Thus, if chess is ultimately always a draw, players should try to play an amazing game that has never been seen before while expressing their style, strategies, and tactics, rather than simply playing to win. Check out the game between Carl Hamppe and Philipp Meitner in Vienna 1872. It is known as “The Immortal Draw” and emphasizes my point nicely.
Conclusively, it becomes more apparent that what makes chess interesting is far more than the results, but instead because of the art and beauty produced through the duration of the game. A game that ends in a draw is the best result because it gives people the freedom to produce works of beauty. When I play chess, the board is my canvas, the pieces are my paints, and my mind is the brush.
N. Monk, Philosopher, and Futurist