[nightwood]

[ QUOTE ]

I will tell you this for sure. Poker (hand) discussions will yield much more discussion and require much greater thought and understanding than solvable 3 move chess endings.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're absolutely right about this. But .. solving a mate in three relates to the complexity of chess like say identifying the nuts for a given board to the complexity of poker.

So when you say a president should solve mates in 3 you say something like he should have a 1-2% understanding of chess.

So which part of poker do you want to relate that to ? If you want him to be a winning .10/.20-player it's defintitely more challenging than solving mates in 3.