Paul Goyette challenges my unproven notions of the superiority of black in "perfect" chess:

But I'm not so sure we will ever reach a solution for chess, or even the "still higher levels of play" he refers to. Computers are making rapid advances, yes, but a couple things suggest to me that this progress will be limited.

I happen to agree with Paul's guess that chess may never be solved, but that doesn't eliminate the prospect of its being theoretically solvable. [There are a finite number of possible chess games, owing to various stalemate rules-- a very large number, but a finite one.] On the important differences between -ed endings and -able endings, I cite The Salmon of Doubt:

He just gave the Melinda woman a cold look and said, "This is a respectable private investigation business. I . . ."

"Respectable, she said, "or respected?"

"What do you mean?" Dirk usually produced much sharper retorts than this, but, as the woman said, she had caught him at a bad time.

"Big difference," the Melinda woman continued. "Like the difference between something that's supposedly inflatable and something that's actually inflated. Between something that's supposedly unbreakable and something that will actually surive a good fling at the wall."