>Grandmaster (GM) András Adorján wrote a series of books on the theme that "Black is OK!", arguing that the general perception that White has an advantage is founded more in psychology than reality.
>GM Mihai Suba and others contend that sometimes White's initiative disappears for no apparent reason as a game progresses.
>Modern writers also argue that Black has certain countervailing advantages.
>Some symmetrical openings (i.e. those where Black's moves copy White's) can lead to situations where moving first is a detriment, for either psychological or objective reasons.
>"The first move is an advantage, ... but if properly answered, the first move is of little worth".
and
>Steinitz, the first World Champion wrote in 1889, "It is now conceded by all experts that by proper play on both sides the legitimate issue of a game ought to be a draw." Lasker and Capablanca, the second and third World Champions, agreed. [...]
The view that a game of chess should end in a draw given best play prevails.
nice 'advantage'lol
>Adorján claims that White starts the game with essentially no advantage.
>Adorján goes so far as to claim that, "The tale of White's advantage is a delusion, belief in it is based on mass psychosis."
>Rowson writes that Adorján's "contention is one of the most important chess ideas of the last two decades ... because it has shaken our assumption that White begins the game with some advantage, and revealed its ideological nature".
>Rowson argues that both White and Black have certain advantages:
>[...] Second, "White's 'extra move' can be a burden, and sometimes White finds himself in a mild form of zugzwang
>[...] Fourth, "The fact that White moves before Black often gives Black useful information".
>[...] Suba writes, "In terms of the mathematical games theory, chess is a game of complete information, and Black's information is always greater—by one move!"