There is an Ideal Opening Move in Chess

"Con has conceded my first theorem. I will take this to be conceded for the remainder of the debate"I AGREED with the theorem, there is a difference============================================================================Wording of Resolution:"The move must enable the player to guarantee a tie or a win. If the player, due to human error, does not capitalize on this opportunity, that does not matter"If a move only enables a player to win or tie, then it still does not determine once and for all what the final outcome will be. It increases your odds of winning, but it doesnt guarantee the desired result because what determines a win, a tie, or a loss are the moves that come AFTER an initial move. For a move to be an "ideal" move it must guarantee victory or a tie, it can't just enable it because then that leaves the move open to compromise, being countered, and not yield the desired result. "an ideal opening move has been made and yielded a loss countless times in the history of the game of chess."Then the "ideal" move does not guarantee victory or a tie. It holds little significance at all since the "ideal" move can be canceled out both by human error from you and from a counter measure from the opponent. "The move must exist in the game. It is not necessary that anyone be able to determine what it is."Im not asking you to determine what it is. Im only asking how an ideal move can exist when so much of the game is based on the mistakes made by you and your opponent by not recognizing certain factors over the course of the game. After that then I ask how there could be an ideal OPENING move since what determines if someone wins or loses is determined by all the subsequent moves by you along with the counter measures by the opponent. ============================================================================Chance in Chess"Con confuses chance in human behavior with chance in the game. While a human being can play a blunder, the blunder was always the purely deterministic result of an intentional move that turned out to be wrong"The game is controlled by people though, if someone makes an ill-advised move it is ill advised not because the human did it randomly, but because he did not take into account all of the information available to him when he made his move because the player overlooked a variable. Something that you said was impossible" In chess, both players can see everything relevant to the game on the board before their eyes; there are no hidden variables"Two seconds later..."Humans might fail to notice something on the board, but I am not arguing that humans recognize everything on the board. I'm just arguing that it's there. That's all that's necessary for an ideal move to exist."There exists the possibility for variables to not be taken into account. This could then cause the player make an ill-advised move which would then compromise any move they made before which allegedly guarantees them victory. This means that the move meant to guarantee them victory was lost. Thus there cant be an ideal move since there exists the potential to overlook variables which would forfeit their "guarantee" of winning"A perfect move would be the result of luck and could not be guaranteed."A perfect move doesnt exist in Chess either because the results of all the moves made after the initial move through the course of the game isnt guaranteed either since Chess is a game of luck and making less mistakes than your opponent. ============================================================================"A normal human being will not fail to move a piece to the correct position when making a move."Oh thats what you meant by desired position, I mistook that to mean something else. I apologize for my goof============================================================================Game States"I didn't say immediately accessible game states. I mean all possible future positions"Well you should have specified that before -_____-"The number of states immediately legally accessible can range from 0 to 218 and goes up and down throughout the game"Yes I agree to this, however the way you worded your arguments before it sounded like you were saying that the number of possible game states can only go down.... Thank you for clarifying============================================================================A Chess tree I mistook this argument as the Pro claiming that there exists a path from the beginning of the game to the end that always guarantees a win or a tie. I apologize for my second goof.============================================================================Finite-ness of the game of Chess"Con's chief objection to this is that, "Chess is limited in the number of turns you have... But the number of MOVES you can make increases and then decreases through the game, whereas tic-tac-toe only decreases." I fail to see the relevance of this."In Tic-Tac-Toe you only eliminate available spaces with your pieces to try to get three in a row and you get as many pieces as you need. Pieces cannot be moved, removed, captured, etc. In Chess though the object of the game is much more complex. You start with many pieces then lose them over time, spaces are only temporarily occupied and can be taken, and the amount of moves you have to make at any given turn increases as the game progresses than decreases as pieces are eliminated. Why is this relevant?In Tic Tac Toe an ideal move does exist, and once you make that move your opponent cannot terminate that piece, or The Pro compares Chess to Tic-Tac-Toe by saying that since both trees eventually come to an end, if someone goes through the tree and wins then that implies there is an ideal first move" If two people were playing a game..... and the winner was the one who moved last, there would always be a perfect strategy for both trees."Just because one wins a game of chess it doesnt imply that a perfect strategy exists because that particular route to victory that person just took could have been countered in numerous ways, along with any other path to victory that other people have taken. There are thousands and thousands of ways for someone to win a game of chess which means in the game tree there would be thousands and thousands of ways to go through the whole tree and win. This in no way suggests there is an ideal move that guarantees victory. "the fact that a human may fail to play correctly, is, again, irrelevant to whether or not an ideal move exists"There is a difference between a move that increases your odds of winning and a move that guarantees victory. If a move were truly ideal then it would still be able to guarantee victory despite human error, and there is no such OPENING move in either Chess or in Tic-Tac-Toe since both games are entirely decided by later moves in the game. Running low on characters, ill jump to the Conclusion.There could very well be an opening move in Chess that increases your odds of winning. But chess is a game of so many different variables that there isnt a single opening move that guarantees victory. Furthermore a move that is only one of many, many other moves needed to enable victory is a far cry from being an ideal opening move that guarantees a victory and a tie. Back to you Pro :)