Intransitively winning chess players positions
This work addresses foundational game theory problems for chess and positional games, highlighting implications for strategy and complexity, but is incremental as it builds on existing theorems.
The paper investigates intransitive (rock-paper-scissors-like) relations in chess positions, showing that such non-transitive winningness arises due to the game's complexity, contrasting with simpler transitive games, and complements the Zermelo-von Neumann theorem by addressing limitations of pure strategies based on transitivity.
Positions of chess players in intransitive (rock-paper-scissors) relations are considered. Namely, position A of White is preferable (it should be chosen if choice is possible) to position B of Black, position B of Black is preferable to position C of White, position C of White is preferable to position D of Black, but position D of Black is preferable to position A of White. Intransitivity of winningness of positions of chess players is considered to be a consequence of complexity of the chess environment -- in contrast with simpler games with transitive positions only. The space of relations between winningness of positions of chess players is non-Euclidean. The Zermelo-von Neumann theorem is complemented by statements about possibility vs. impossibility of building pure winning strategies based on the assumption of transitivity of positions of chess players. Questions about the possibility of intransitive positions of players in other positional games are raised.