*Consider a deterministic, perfect information, abstract strategy, finite game , with absurdly large state space, say ...chess*

**Q1** Is the game translatable to an axiomatic system?

**Q2** Can all statements in the game be proven or dis proven, are they decidable? Do we have an 'Incompleteness" at play here? (Assuming that the game has not/cannot be solved given our computation resources.)

> **Examples : Statements in Chess** : 
          
 *"There is a set of moves (starting from initial position) which lead white to win regardless                  
  of black's moves" (Perfect strategy)
          
 "There is a set of moves which lead white not  to loose regardless of black's moves" (Perfect 
  strategy)
          
  "All games are decidable (White wins looses or stalemates)after  n-moves into the game" (Forcing a 
    win)
           
  "Given a position, exists a function which tells if a game is decidable from that point on"* 



**Q3** Is there an 'intuitive' truth in statements of chess, say as seen by grandmasters which can not be proven?

> Aim of the questions is to check behavior for infinitely large state spaces with rule based transitions.