He was not wrong at all , but with the endless possibilities of mating on a given square , there must be permutations of patterns , which if the pattern is taken as a combination reduces the possibilities by some margin. Yet this number is still unfathomable. The fact that endgames are well analyzed and that collections like table base exists suggests that Fischer random has a valid reason for existence , but this is not so.

The less pieces on the board the easier analysis becomes. No one can question that , but how do you get to that ideal position , where the possibilities are finite? You have to traverse the maze of infinite possibilities to get to a position which you can recognize , analyze and master with the recall of simple theory. This is barely recall , but rather implementation of theory. Take a mate with two bishops for example , we know the end position , but no one memorizes every move to get to that position

An example of mate with two bishops |

So in conclusion , the law of large numbers suggests that with enough games every possible position will appear so there is merit in chess becoming more analyzed , but analyzed to the point where we have to switch pieces around , I don't believe that is possible. However still one of the most entertaining afternoons I had in my chess career to date.