Chance doesn't exist, so in theory, luck doesn't exist either. Everything follows an inevitable order in the universe.
But we still use the term "luck" to refer to the fortune someone has had in winning a game.
You could say, "But he's more skilled, that's why he won," but skill is also a form of luck. It's like with beauty someone who's good looking has luck, just like someone who's not.
If chess were a complete game of luck, then nobody would waste their time trying to perfect their play. Chess famously has no element of chance because the board position and result of the game is entirely up to the determination of the players.
Most people have the illusion that they are free, and that's why they try to perfect their game.
Anyway, one always tries to improve because it's entertaining, it's fun to learn new things, but in the end, whether you win or lose doesn't depend on you or your effort. Carlsen is not the player who has put in the most effort in chess, that's one hundred percent sure. There are players within the top 100 who have sacrificed much more for chess, and yet they are semi-unknown
ps :
Human laws assume that humans have free will, which proves that the judicial system is a scam from start to finish, but that’s another topic
so you think everything is predetermined from the start?
It’s not that I think or believe it, I am certain that everything is predetermined.
Three years ago, I wrote a book and demonstrated that an event would happen 9 months before it actually occurred.
I predicted that event based on the study of gematria, the study of basic mathematics
Considering humans are illogical saying that you support only logical ideals like predeterminism is kinda a fallicy physics is still like a baby (maybe like a 3 year old child ) for now I highly doubt we know enough to determine the laws of the universe
There are scientists who have proven that everything is determined through neuroscience experiments.
I myself have proven it through my book, predicting an event through mathematics that would happen 9 months after I wrote that book
Yes yes I know the issue with neuroscience is outside factors influence it also it honestly depends I doubt we truly know that much about nuroscience yet even if it doesn't seem like free will we can still tweak it yes you can predict something that will happen in the future it depends the issue is we know a lot less then we think we do assuming everysyhings predetermined might be a rushed decision
If you want, I can show you the simple way I came to the understanding and certainty that free will doesn't exist. I found numerological and mathematical patterns in nature and in events like terrorist attacks, where certain numbers clearly repeat in an incredible way.
These patterns prove that our reality follows a perfect mathematical order, and that order can be read through the study of gematria and basic numerology
though, of course, the official academic world does not recognize these truths yet. Maybe in 10 or 20 years, but anyway, I can explain to you how I arrived at this conclusion if you're interested.
It is quite clear this is an elaborate troll, not a very funny one, please avoid...
The troll is you. I can provide arguments and proofs for everything I'm saying.
If you don't know what to say, it's better to stay silent
Okay Ill bite. If its all mathematical and provable what is going to happen... 1. Where do you get the numbers from 2. Once I got the proof for the next 20 years.. I can then go change whatever the numbers tell me. 3. If the numbers are only available after the fact.. then it sounds to me like an emergent property from the events, not the other way round.
Okay, your move.
It is almost never possible to predict an event before it happens, although there are people who specialize in this within the world of gematria, known as gematria decoders.
Once the event happens, you can find its hidden numerology, which is easier because you already have all the information available.
But these numbers must have some kind of coherence for the gematria community to accept your code, and so it doesn't look like you're inventing meaningless numerical connections, because many people do that.
There are various ways to obtain the numbers.
The most paradigmatic and famous case is the 9/11 attack, where there were many 11s everywhere, and 911 also appeared.
I have analyzed other cases, like the Nice attack (2016) and the Barcelona attack (2017).
But I didn't study these cases with gematria because, at that time, I hadn't studied anything about this topic.
If you want, we can start by looking at the death of Muhammad Ali and how the day and year of his death were destined.
If chess were a complete game of luck, then nobody would waste their time trying to perfect their play. Chess famously has no element of chance because the board position and result of the game is entirely up to the determination of the players.
Most people have the illusion that they are free, and that's why they try to perfect their game.
Anyway, one always tries to improve because it's entertaining, it's fun to learn new things, but in the end, whether you win or lose doesn't depend on you or your effort. Carlsen is not the player who has put in the most effort in chess, that's one hundred percent sure. There are players within the top 100 who have sacrificed much more for chess, and yet they are semi-unknown
ps :
Human laws assume that humans have free will, which proves that the judicial system is a scam from start to finish, but that’s another topic
so you think everything is predetermined from the start?
It’s not that I think or believe it, I am certain that everything is predetermined.
Three years ago, I wrote a book and demonstrated that an event would happen 9 months before it actually occurred.
I predicted that event based on the study of gematria, the study of basic mathematics
Considering humans are illogical saying that you support only logical ideals like predeterminism is kinda a fallicy physics is still like a baby (maybe like a 3 year old child ) for now I highly doubt we know enough to determine the laws of the universe
There are scientists who have proven that everything is determined through neuroscience experiments.
I myself have proven it through my book, predicting an event through mathematics that would happen 9 months after I wrote that book
Yes yes I know the issue with neuroscience is outside factors influence it also it honestly depends I doubt we truly know that much about nuroscience yet even if it doesn't seem like free will we can still tweak it yes you can predict something that will happen in the future it depends the issue is we know a lot less then we think we do assuming everysyhings predetermined might be a rushed decision
If you want, I can show you the simple way I came to the understanding and certainty that free will doesn't exist. I found numerological and mathematical patterns in nature and in events like terrorist attacks, where certain numbers clearly repeat in an incredible way.
These patterns prove that our reality follows a perfect mathematical order, and that order can be read through the study of gematria and basic numerology
though, of course, the official academic world does not recognize these truths yet. Maybe in 10 or 20 years, but anyway, I can explain to you how I arrived at this conclusion if you're interested.
It is quite clear this is an elaborate troll, not a very funny one, please avoid...
The troll is you. I can provide arguments and proofs for everything I'm saying.
If you don't know what to say, it's better to stay silent
Okay Ill bite. If its all mathematical and provable what is going to happen... 1. Where do you get the numbers from 2. Once I got the proof for the next 20 years.. I can then go change whatever the numbers tell me. 3. If the numbers are only available after the fact.. then it sounds to me like an emergent property from the events, not the other way round.
Okay, your move.
It is almost never possible to predict an event before it happens, although there are people who specialize in this within the world of gematria, known as gematria decoders.
Once the event happens, you can find its hidden numerology, which is easier because you already have all the information available.
But these numbers must have some kind of coherence for the gematria community to accept your code, and so it doesn't look like you're inventing meaningless numerical connections, because many people do that.
There are various ways to obtain the numbers.
The most paradigmatic and famous case is the 9/11 attack, where there were many 11s everywhere, and 911 also appeared.
I have analyzed other cases, like the Nice attack (2016) and the Barcelona attack (2017).
But I didn't study these cases with gematria because, at that time, I hadn't studied anything about this topic.
If you want, we can start by looking at the death of Muhammad Ali and how the day and year of his death were destined.
I have no knowledge on the matter as I think it is bogus..
But again, if the "hidden numerology" is only available after the event, this hints at it being emergent from the way events did happen.. Not the other way around. What is the evidence supporting the deterministic point of view?
If chess were a complete game of luck, then nobody would waste their time trying to perfect their play. Chess famously has no element of chance because the board position and result of the game is entirely up to the determination of the players.
Most people have the illusion that they are free, and that's why they try to perfect their game.
Anyway, one always tries to improve because it's entertaining, it's fun to learn new things, but in the end, whether you win or lose doesn't depend on you or your effort. Carlsen is not the player who has put in the most effort in chess, that's one hundred percent sure. There are players within the top 100 who have sacrificed much more for chess, and yet they are semi-unknown
ps :
Human laws assume that humans have free will, which proves that the judicial system is a scam from start to finish, but that’s another topic
so you think everything is predetermined from the start?
It’s not that I think or believe it, I am certain that everything is predetermined.
Three years ago, I wrote a book and demonstrated that an event would happen 9 months before it actually occurred.
I predicted that event based on the study of gematria, the study of basic mathematics
Considering humans are illogical saying that you support only logical ideals like predeterminism is kinda a fallicy physics is still like a baby (maybe like a 3 year old child ) for now I highly doubt we know enough to determine the laws of the universe
There are scientists who have proven that everything is determined through neuroscience experiments.
I myself have proven it through my book, predicting an event through mathematics that would happen 9 months after I wrote that book
Yes yes I know the issue with neuroscience is outside factors influence it also it honestly depends I doubt we truly know that much about nuroscience yet even if it doesn't seem like free will we can still tweak it yes you can predict something that will happen in the future it depends the issue is we know a lot less then we think we do assuming everysyhings predetermined might be a rushed decision
If you want, I can show you the simple way I came to the understanding and certainty that free will doesn't exist. I found numerological and mathematical patterns in nature and in events like terrorist attacks, where certain numbers clearly repeat in an incredible way.
These patterns prove that our reality follows a perfect mathematical order, and that order can be read through the study of gematria and basic numerology
though, of course, the official academic world does not recognize these truths yet. Maybe in 10 or 20 years, but anyway, I can explain to you how I arrived at this conclusion if you're interested.
It is quite clear this is an elaborate troll, not a very funny one, please avoid...
The troll is you. I can provide arguments and proofs for everything I'm saying.
If you don't know what to say, it's better to stay silent
Okay Ill bite. If its all mathematical and provable what is going to happen... 1. Where do you get the numbers from 2. Once I got the proof for the next 20 years.. I can then go change whatever the numbers tell me. 3. If the numbers are only available after the fact.. then it sounds to me like an emergent property from the events, not the other way round.
Okay, your move.
It is almost never possible to predict an event before it happens, although there are people who specialize in this within the world of gematria, known as gematria decoders.
Once the event happens, you can find its hidden numerology, which is easier because you already have all the information available.
But these numbers must have some kind of coherence for the gematria community to accept your code, and so it doesn't look like you're inventing meaningless numerical connections, because many people do that.
There are various ways to obtain the numbers.
The most paradigmatic and famous case is the 9/11 attack, where there were many 11s everywhere, and 911 also appeared.
I have analyzed other cases, like the Nice attack (2016) and the Barcelona attack (2017).
But I didn't study these cases with gematria because, at that time, I hadn't studied anything about this topic.
If you want, we can start by looking at the death of Muhammad Ali and how the day and year of his death were destined.
I have no knowledge on the matter as I think it is bogus..
But again, if the "hidden numerology" is only available after the event, this hints at it being emergent from the way events did happen.. Not the other way around. What is the evidence supporting the deterministic point of view?
I see that you have biases by calling it a bogus ; this way, it’s impossible for you to even begin studying anything.
Negative, numerology is always present before events happen, and by the way, I proved this by publishing a book in March 2022, where I compiled all the numerological codes gathered from the gematria community, which indicated beyond any doubt that Argentina would win the World Cup that same year in December.
Logically, the normal approach is not to predict an event but to study past events through an in-depth analysis of this numerology. And if you do so, you will come across very interesting surprises. But of course, if you have prejudices, it’s impossible for you to even consider doing it, haha.
@jicidus says
"Logically, the normal approach is not to predict an event but to study past events through an in-depth analysis of this numerology. And if you do so, you will come across very interesting surprises."
There seems to be a logical dilemma.
If the numerology is studied after the event, there is no way to prove it hasnt emerged from how the event happened.
If its available to be studied before an event, nothing stops a person from obtaining the information and then influencing the event before it happens.
@jicidus says
"Logically, the normal approach is not to predict an event but to study past events through an in-depth analysis of this numerology. And if you do so, you will come across very interesting surprises."
There seems to be a logical dilemma.
If the numerology is studied after the event, there is no way to prove it hasnt emerged from how the event happened.
If its available to be studied before an event, nothing stops a person from obtaining the information and then influencing the event before it happens.
Numbers will always be there before, during, and after the event.
It’s easy to understand, and there’s nothing illogical about it.
Some of us have detected that there is a hidden numerical logic behind these events.
Unfortunately, many of these people end up in the world of conspiracy theories, claiming that this numerology exists because an "elite" is controlling events, which is why these numerical patterns repeat.
Obviously, these people are not explaining the objective phenomenon in a coherent, scientific, and rational manner.
That’s why these topics have such a bad reputation in the academic world at least, that’s my opinion.
For example, I have studied GM Valeri Salov’s theory about 9/11, and it’s clear that there is no conspiracy as he suggests.
However, he has discovered a natural phenomenon that no one had noticed before, during the Anand-Kasparov match in 1995 in New York.
If you want more info on the topic, look up "Salov conspiracy theories"
there’s an interview with him.
Even if you obtain the information before the event happens, you wouldn’t be able to prevent its outcome.
There are other ways to obtain information about the future, such as premonitory dreams.
Some of these, by the way, have gone viral cases where people predicted things that seemed completely impossible, and yet they actually happened in reality, haha.
I will give you proof of an astonishing premonitory dream that proves destiny is already written, but you’ll have to translate the news : 
@jcidus
Okay, but what about the second part of my comment.
If the numbers were there always from the beginning, then nothing stops us from gaining as much information about the future as we'd like. Combined with other ways to gain informarion, you mentioned "premonitory dreams". Well in that case, what stops a person from critically influencing these events before they happen, since they can see it coming? This would then undo the whole theory of determinism as decision by an individual influenced the "predetermined" future.
Hilarious stuff bro. So let me recap what you have said so far: Chess is luck because:
If weaker rated player beats a stronger player from time to time that is luck
If a better player beats a weaker player that is luck because he was born with better genetics
Statistics are an illusion because you might get lucky and that is why luck beats statistics
I am laughing as I am typing this.
Have you even heard of this thing called basic probability theory. Yes chance and luck are everywhere around us which is why we have found ways to study chance in a logical manner and we can use the ELO rating system as a foundation in this case.
The Elo system uses a logistic function to translate the rating difference into a win probability. This function ensures that the probability smoothly increases as the rating difference grows.
Formula: The win probability for Player A against Player B is calculated as:
2. Applying Probability to Multiple Games
Independent Games: We often assume that chess games are independent events. This means that the outcome of one game doesn't influence the outcome of the next.
Binomial Distribution: With the assumption of independence, we can use the binomial distribution to model the probability of a certain number of wins in a series of games.
Formula: The probability of Player A winning exactly k games out of n games is:
Expected Wins: The expected number of wins for Player A in a series of n games is simply n×p
3. Example: A Series of Games
Scenario: Let's say Player A has a rating of 1800 and Player B has a rating of 2000. They are playing a best-of-three match.
Win Probability: Using the Elo formula, the probability of Player A winning a single game is approximately 0.22 (or 22%).
Binomial Calculation: To find the probability of Player A winning the entire match (2 out of 3 games), we use the binomial distribution:
@jcidus
Okay, but what about the second part of my comment.
If the numbers were there always from the beginning, then nothing stops us from gaining as much information about the future as we'd like. Combined with other ways to gain informarion, you mentioned "premonitory dreams". Well in that case, what stops a person from critically influencing these events before they happen, since they can see it coming? This would then undo the whole theory of determinism as decision by an individual influenced the "predetermined" future.
Maybe with the progress of artificial intelligence and training an AI to make calculations on numerology and gematria, we could obtain these numbers to predict certain events, like natural disasters , sporting events or the future president more effectively.
But it’s not realistic, just like it’s not possible to solve chess.
For example, it’s not realistic to go to a casino and predict the numbers that will come up in roulette. To begin with, because you can't relate those numbers to "anything."
From our point of view, the numbers that come up seem random (although behind that randomness, there might be a cosmic order that humans can’t fully comprehend).
Regarding your second question,
Even if you're able to see the future, you can't avoid it in any way.
Premonitory dreams can happen to anyone at any moment; you don’t provoke them.
Let’s imagine you dream that Donald Trump is going to become a dictator, so you try to avoid it before it happens
So you go to a political rally and shoot him in the head, but you miss the attempt and hit his ear, just like in the real world.
So you can't change the future, even if you know it or even if you wish to change it.
Hilarious stuff bro. So let me recap what you have said so far: Chess is luck because:
If weaker rated player beats a stronger player from time to time that is luck
If a better player beats a weaker player that is luck because he was born with better genetics
Statistics are an illusion because you might get lucky and that is why luck beats statistics
I am laughing as I am typing this.
Have you even heard of this thing called basic probability theory. Yes chance and luck are everywhere around us which is why we have found ways to study chance in a logical manner and we can use the ELO rating system as a foundation in this case.
The Elo system uses a logistic function to translate the rating difference into a win probability. This function ensures that the probability smoothly increases as the rating difference grows.
Formula: The win probability for Player A against Player B is calculated as:
2. Applying Probability to Multiple Games
Independent Games: We often assume that chess games are independent events. This means that the outcome of one game doesn't influence the outcome of the next.
Binomial Distribution: With the assumption of independence, we can use the binomial distribution to model the probability of a certain number of wins in a series of games.
Formula: The probability of Player A winning exactly k games out of n games is:
Expected Wins: The expected number of wins for Player A in a series of n games is simply n×p
3. Example: A Series of Games
Scenario: Let's say Player A has a rating of 1800 and Player B has a rating of 2000. They are playing a best-of-three match.
Win Probability: Using the Elo formula, the probability of Player A winning a single game is approximately 0.22 (or 22%).
Binomial Calculation: To find the probability of Player A winning the entire match (2 out of 3 games), we use the binomial distribution:
I know that the study of probabilities is necessary
if not, betting houses wouldn't make money.
Chance and luck, as such, don’t exist.
When I refer to luck, I’m talking about the fortune someone has when winning a game.
Some might say that they didn’t win by luck, but by skill, but skill is a type of luck.
It's like someone being born more handsome than another. There’s no merit in being more skilled or more intelligent, or even having studied more (effort), because to study, you need free time, and not only that, you need effective methods to truly improve your chess.
I know that the study of probabilities is necessary
if not, betting houses wouldn't make money.
Chance and luck, as such, don’t exist.
When I refer to luck, I’m talking about the fortune someone has when winning a game.
Some might say that they didn’t win by luck, but by skill, but skill is a type of luck.
It's like someone being born more handsome than another. There’s no merit in being more skilled or more intelligent, or even having studied more (effort), because to study, you need free time, and not only that, you need effective methods to truly improve your chess.
What has having more time to study got to do with luck then? How about not having the time but finding it. You got to bed at 10 I go at 11 and study an extra hour. No luck involved.
I know that the study of probabilities is necessary
if not, betting houses wouldn't make money.
Chance and luck, as such, don’t exist.
When I refer to luck, I’m talking about the fortune someone has when winning a game.
Some might say that they didn’t win by luck, but by skill, but skill is a type of luck.
It's like someone being born more handsome than another. There’s no merit in being more skilled or more intelligent, or even having studied more (effort), because to study, you need free time, and not only that, you need effective methods to truly improve your chess.
What has having more time to study got to do with luck then? How about not having the time but finding it. You got to bed at 10 I go at 11 and study an extra hour. No luck involved.
Luck has to do with it because not everyone is lucky enough to have free time. If you have to work to pay rent and taxes, you already have a lot less time.
Studying one extra hour a day doesn't change much.
For example, even if the great Hans Niemann studied 14 hours a day for a year, he couldn’t beat Carlsen in a match, nor could he play better than Carlsen.
The Norwegian has a naturally superior brain.
I don't know, unless a revolutionary chess training method is invented, I don't see how anyone today could play better than Magnus.
What has having more time to study got to do with luck then? How about not having the time but finding it. You got to bed at 10 I go at 11 and study an extra hour. No luck involved.
Luck has to do with it because not everyone is lucky enough to have free time. If you have to work to pay rent and taxes, you already have a lot less time.
Studying one extra hour a day doesn't change much.
For example, even if the great Hans Niemann studied 14 hours a day for a year, he couldn’t beat Carlsen in a match, nor could he play better than Carlsen.
The Norwegian has a naturally superior brain.
I don't know, unless a revolutionary chess training method is invented, I don't see how anyone today could play better than Magnus.
Well, no because one hour overtime can make a huge difference, make that two hours and the add a full weekend which you don`t work on and there you have it. I am 9-5er and have been busting my ... so your definition of "Luck" cannot be an excuse for other 9-5ers with the same "brain genetics" ,as you call it, who are in similar circumstances but putting in less work. So no luck involved here either I`m afraid.
u know what i had pure luck while playing with a 1800. he resigned the first move E4 !
What has having more time to study got to do with luck then? How about not having the time but finding it. You got to bed at 10 I go at 11 and study an extra hour. No luck involved.
Luck has to do with it because not everyone is lucky enough to have free time. If you have to work to pay rent and taxes, you already have a lot less time.
Studying one extra hour a day doesn't change much.
For example, even if the great Hans Niemann studied 14 hours a day for a year, he couldn’t beat Carlsen in a match, nor could he play better than Carlsen.
The Norwegian has a naturally superior brain.
I don't know, unless a revolutionary chess training method is invented, I don't see how anyone today could play better than Magnus.
Well, no because one hour overtime can make a huge difference, make that two hours and the add a full weekend which you don`t work on and there you have it. I am 9-5er and have been busting my ... so your definition of "Luck" cannot be an excuse for other 9-5ers with the same "brain genetics" ,as you call it, who are in similar circumstances but putting in less work. So no luck involved here either I`m afraid.
No one has the same brain genetics and there is no clear way to measure it, IQ tests aren't much help either
It's like in a group of friends, there's always one who will be more attractive than the others and overshadow them.
Elite chess is like a beauty contest where the same people almost always win because they have greater ability, not because they put in more effort.
In my chess club, I've had teammates who I know worked much harder than I did, and they never reached my level of play, but the opposite has also happened to me.
My brother has always been better than me at chess, and no matter how hard I've worked to reach his level, I haven't succeeded, even though I've beaten him occasionally.
Also, in my city, there's a grandmaster with a 2500 rating, with whom I've played some poker games, who has never read a chess book in his life, barely studied, but had a special innate talent. Many criticized him for being lazy, saying he was very much into partying, but with his talent, he could easily have a 2700 rating...
But even not being lazy, being a hard worker is also a talent, it's a skill.
Not everyone has the endurance, the resilience, and the ability to study chess for four hours every day, no matter how much inner talent they have.
In the end, talent can prevail or hard work can prevail, sometimes one, sometimes the other. Obviously, to reach the elite, hard work is inevitable.
Now, we could discuss which is more important, hard work in chess or talent.
I believe it's natural talent, although a GM from my country, whom I admire a lot, says it's not.
He believes that in the end, what matters most on the board is hard work, not so much one’s talent.
@jcidus
Okay, but what about the second part of my comment.
If the numbers were there always from the beginning, then nothing stops us from gaining as much information about the future as we'd like. Combined with other ways to gain informarion, you mentioned "premonitory dreams". Well in that case, what stops a person from critically influencing these events before they happen, since they can see it coming? This would then undo the whole theory of determinism as decision by an individual influenced the "predetermined" future.
Maybe with the progress of artificial intelligence and training an AI to make calculations on numerology and gematria, we could obtain these numbers to predict certain events, like natural disasters , sporting events or the future president more effectively.
But it’s not realistic, just like it’s not possible to solve chess.
For example, it’s not realistic to go to a casino and predict the numbers that will come up in roulette. To begin with, because you can't relate those numbers to "anything."
From our point of view, the numbers that come up seem random (although behind that randomness, there might be a cosmic order that humans can’t fully comprehend).
Regarding your second question,
Even if you're able to see the future, you can't avoid it in any way.
Premonitory dreams can happen to anyone at any moment; you don’t provoke them.
Let’s imagine you dream that Donald Trump is going to become a dictator, so you try to avoid it before it happens
So you go to a political rally and shoot him in the head, but you miss the attempt and hit his ear, just like in the real world.
So you can't change the future, even if you know it or even if you wish to change it.
The dilemma still remains for your theory, something has to give.
1. If we can't collect information that allows us to predict a future event, but only discover the numbers afterwards.... Then the numbers might be an emergent property from the event. How do you prove its not?
2. If we are able to collect information about a future event (whatever the method may be), then we are able to influence these events before they happen. This would imply decisions influence outcomes and invalidate theory of determinism..
How you answer the latter doesnt make sense and lacks reasoning.. If the information is freely accessible, it cannot be that anybody who uses the information still cannot influence the outcome.. Imagine if everyone had access to an AI tool that interprets future events for them. It doesnt make sense that any action they take based on this information wouldnt change any of the predicted events.
Something has to give.
Edit. Example in last paragraph edited.
No, chess is a game of skill with a very small element of chance.
Negative, what you call skill is just the luck of having a brain or genetics better suited.
When two players are at a similar level, the result is said to be 50%, like flipping a coin. But this is actually an illusion because the outcome is already determined in time. Therefore, one player always has a 100% chance of winning or losing that game.
Yes, in time, as the game is being played. The game is not decided before it starts.
And anyway, at any given moment, the player with the “better chances” might blunder, so it’s impossible to truly have a 100% chance of winning.