That is true, but we shouldn't rely on luck when we are starting the event. Our position should be solid or flexible enough that events shouldn't widely change the evaluation.
Martin vs the world analysis thread #3
Sort:
It's kind of like poker. You don't rely on luck, instead you rely on probability. The only difference is I'm familiar with the probabilities when it comes to poker, but with event chess I have no idea. There probably is an optimal opening to improve one's chances of getting a favourable event, but it's a case of trial and error really. Next time I'm involved in an event game, I'll encourage discussion about this.
Rematch - https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/martin0-vs-the-world-event-chess-game-4
You gonna start a new discussion thread Ry?
Considering that if not for Martin's benevolence, he would have scored a win, and knowing that White has three consecutive wins in a row — moreover, a 100% winning streak — this then portends that in Event Variation Chess, luck comes from guessing the hand the pawn is in when deciding who plays White.
I think that's results orientated. Had we got a favourable event, we'd be patting ourselves on the back for the timing. Martin's timing was superb... and that came after ours. Of course, if it was a different event, his timing might have been terrible. I think you just have to accept is as the luck aspect of event chess.