Intransitively winning chess players positions

TL;DR

This paper explores the concept of intransitive relations among chess positions, revealing complex non-Euclidean structures and implications for strategy development in chess and similar games.

Contribution

It introduces the idea of intransitive winning positions in chess, contrasting with traditional transitive assumptions, and discusses their implications for game complexity and strategy.

Findings

Intransitive relations exist among chess positions.

The space of winningness relations is non-Euclidean.

Pure winning strategies may be impossible under intransitivity.

Abstract

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.