Chess and Gambling


Sometimes to win you must lose something ... and one who wins from a losing position is called a gambler. I think chess and gambling are deeply related. It's also gambling when you intent to play black. I don't know the statistical correlation between chess ratings and gambler ratings, however i feel that deep chess players are also deep gamblers.


I'm a chesser but not a gambler.


"It's also gambling when you intent to play black."

Yes, I think that is the most important part.  I am winning a lot with white, but with black you are always less prepared.


Your definition of gambling is totally off. Do you really think you know about gambling?


Actually, the higher level the chess, the less of a gambling element. Gambling is a form of "hoping" and "wishing". If you're hoping and wishing in a game a chess, it's fantasy chess, and weak chess.

Even the most skilled player in the world of "gambling" still has to hope and wish for the favorable outcome.

There is a whole legal theory of what a "game of skill" is vs. a "game of chance".


manavendra, your post is really strange. I get a feeling that you either not expressing your idea clearly, or you are not sure what gambling is. Chess is a game, just like card based games, or backgammon. On their own they're not "gambling games" but people have played, and still play for money over these games. Chess is probably used for gambling the least. The gambling can happen not just between players, but between observers, which is called chess hustling. However, if you play and you do not gamble, then there is no gambling in chess.

Maybe you mean to suggest that chess has an element of chance?

Gambling consists of three elements: risk, contest and reward. Under federal law, Gambling is defined as a contest of predominantly chance, such as slots, raffles, and lotteries.

States also define gambling differently within their individual jurisdictions. Five or six states are generally excluded from participating in those same-day fantasy sports contests because their laws do not differentiate between the elements of skill or chance in a contest or gambling activity.

Chess for money is nothing new, and why the game of chess, like poker, has been explicitly banned in some places over periods of time.

Even the 116th US OPEN Chess Championship, with its $180 fee and $50k cash prize pool is gambling under AZ law, where it was conducted in 2015. Arizona has an intellectual gambling exclusion that allows skill games like the US OPEN Chess Championship to be conducted as lawfully excluded gambling.

The OP touchs on an area of chess that hasn't really been discussed much. In a losing position you might see the annotator saying something like "Black/white decides to roll the dice" - a phrase used in the "Dangerous Weapons" book series....

I've begun to think that playing for a win as black against older stodgy players might necessitate trying different defences rather than risk the draw. Alekhine's and 1...g6 might be a good "bet"...

In a complex position where time is short , a sacrifice might suggest itself without time for calculating variations....

The last round of a tournament where only a win will do is another example where "risky" strategy is an option...

(I remember something about Frank Marshall liking  roulette...An ex player of my club won a big poker tournament...)




I don't understand the logic of people playing casinos or anything like that. This is a senseless waste of money.


this site can play chess with bet its best i got a lot of money

[removed - MS]


its best casinos can play bet chess


In South Caroling section 16-19-10 Code of Laws prohibits the conducting of a lottery in that state. In Darlington Theater v. Coker, 190 S.C. 282, 2 S.E. 2ed 787 (1762), the State Supreme Court determined that a lottery consists of three elements
1. The offering of a prize;
2. The payment of money or other consideration for an opportunity to win the prize;
3. the awarding of the prize by chance.
Present laws provide for an exception for lotteries conducted by or on behalf of charitable organizations.
The key element is section 3.
Generally, it has be stated that
    (c)hance, as one of the elements of a lottery, has reference to the attempt to attain certain ends, not by skill or any known fixed rules, but by the happening of a subsequent event, incapable of ascertainment or accomplishment by means of human foresight or ingenuity.... (I)t is not necessary that this element of chance be pure chance but it may be accompanied by an element of calculation or even of certainty; it is sufficient if chance is the dominant or controlling factor.....

38 Am. Jur. 2d. Gambling, section 9 pp. 115-116. Similarly
    (c)hance within the lottery statute is one which dominates of skill or judgment. The measure is a qualitative one; that is, the chance must be an integral part that influences the result. The measure is not a quantitative proportion of skill and chances in viewing the scheme as a whole.

Seattle Times Co. v. Tielech, 495 P. 2d 1366 at 1369 (Wash. 1972). 
See also: Opinions of the Attorney General dated December 5, 1978, October 11, 1978, and March 17, 1978.

To paraphrase:
In as much as the proposed chess tournament appears to be a game of skill, as opposed to a game of chance, such a tournament would not constitute a lottery.

youngdan97 wrote:

I agree with your point that chess and gambling are deeply related. I think of it in terms of how you make decisions in a situation where you don't know the outcome. You need to make the best decision you can and be willing to accept the consequences of your choices. This is certainly true in both chess and gambling.   

Life is a gamble.

The only way chess would be like gambling, is if you bet on the games.

Corey is correct. If you are not playing and you bet on the outcome of a game you are not playing then that would be gambling. 



Games like chess and go are pretty much the opposite of gambling. It's all about skill and preparation. Of course you can implement aspects of gambling, like placing bets on the outcome, but that doesn't make the game itself a gambling game


It can be gambling. Of course you would have to be very stupid to gamble on it. The way people gamble with chess, or “could” gamble with chess is the same way they gamble in sports or racing horses. They would bet on who would win. And the confidence of the better in their chosen winner would determine how much they would be willing to stake on it. 

What is important is that this type of gambling is inherently separate from the players. It doesn’t provide an “exciting” motivation for the players exactly because there is no unpredictable factor to provide that belief that occasionally they could win despite their limitation of knowledge.


No chess gambling can also have another meaning



When i have 6m lost in later midgame,i find a move which is gambling.I put My rook into a position which must be taken by another's rook or king. if he uses rook ,it leads to a forced checkmate,if taken by king ,i will get a total of 11mark lost and impossible for me to alternate the game anymore