many parts of a chess game are objective, ie; if you move here or there, you will lose immediately, many tactical possibilities in a position are objectively forced. That said, I agree with you that chess in general, on a human level, is subjective. Very many possibilities in chess has kept the game alive and evolving for centuries !
Is chess a subjective game or an objective game?
Sort:
winning is objective but the process was subjective
yes i agree @HorsesGalore it is more about steering the game towards patterns you know better than your opponent.
pdve wrote:
Most of us know that it is impossible to 'correctly' calculate a line through to mate. Even computers cannot do this. Most of us try to aim for certain pawn structures or positions where we feel we may play superiorly. So the question is is chess mostly an objective game or mostly a subjective game. I think it is subjective.
Computers can't do? Probably old myth or bad programs!
Stockfish won't show a mate if the position is not a mate, but will show 0.00 instead.
Crystal ( Special version of Stockfish) see mate in 74 in 11 seconds.
this is an endgame .. far from the complexity of a regular middlegame
Most of us know that it is impossible to 'correctly' calculate a line through to mate. Even computers cannot do this. Most of us try to aim for certain pawn structures or positions where we feel we may play superiorly. So the question is is chess mostly an objective game or mostly a subjective game. I think it is subjective.