Chess is just a Game of luck

@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 :

https://www.abc.es/deportes/futbol/abci-prediccion-imposible-santiago-bernabeu-este-hincha-river-201812011441_noticia.html

@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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

I personally believe that there is no such thing as luck or chance.

nah

why is this forum now filled with a ton of long comments