It's obvious.... or is it? "One of the players is sure to have a winning strategy. This is easy to see, because the game must finish in finitely many moves, and can't be drawn." Is that "easy to see"? It implies a theorum: "If a game must finish in finitely many moves, and can't be drawn, then there must be a winning strategy for one player." No doubt it's "easy to see" once explained, but it's far from obvious to ne... it would be nice to have an explanation, or proof.... Reply
"One of the players is sure to have a winning strategy. This is easy to see, because the game must finish in finitely many moves, and can't be drawn."
Is that "easy to see"?
It implies a theorum: "If a game must finish in finitely many moves, and can't be drawn, then there must be a winning strategy for one player."
No doubt it's "easy to see" once explained, but it's far from obvious to ne... it would be nice to have an explanation, or proof....