No.

Yep, sometimes your opponent misses something they would normally see.

True. Yet you have not won by superior-play. You have won by virtue of blunder/time-mismangement by your opponent.

I got lucky against a good opponent a couple of weeks ago.  Only reason I won the game is because he made an unsound sacrifice - up to that point he had me totally on the ropes.  I call that lucky! 

Yes. Because from a theoretical standpoint, with each side playing perfectly, the result would be draw.  Therefore, whenever someone wins, they are lucky that their opponent made a mistake.  If their opponent hadn't they would have been looking at a draw (unless they made a mistake themselves, then they would be losing.)

I consider myself lucky if I don't get my King and Queen forked twice a week.

Does winning involve any luck ?

No, it doesn't. There's no luck in chess, just great moves and blunders and normal moves. 

Some people may think they're lucky when they beat a 1700 player! :)

I'll rephrase what I said, "I'll be lucky if I only make two blunders a week."

yes, there is luck which comes mostly from human factors! and it's what allows massive upsets to happen.

from a theoretical standpoint, fine, there is no luck. but in practice... theory and practice are different ;p

To put things another way enjoy chess-games that are battle/tussle with opponent but gain little satisfaction by the ones that are won due to blunder/timeout.

Chess like all great games should be a battle of skill not other factors.

The other factors are there whether they exist or not.

Before electricity was invented, electron had been there. Before steam engine was invented, steam had been abundance. Before fire making was discovered, fire had existed long before.

It is a lot easier to win when your opponent blunder, but that doesn't necessarily mean that every win is involved with luck.

well obviously your opponent has to blunder, the quickness of the game depends on the blinder size.

most  chess games have an element of luck in them. There is a correlation [my guess there is] that the higher skills the players are the lest luck plays  a factor.

To the OP...

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Many variables to consider, perpectives + opinion & perception.

for eg. from the previous post... you could catch a GM on a bad day...

You might consider that lucky... they would consider it a bad day.

Both would be right.

Simply a difference in context and perspective.

Winning definately involves circumstance.

Sometimes too a player can have a long think and decide on a great move for all the wrong reasons.  Sometimes, luckily, when the opponent chooses a different line than the main analysis, the player has to rethink the position and ends up responding correctly.  However if the opponent had tested the move as in the analysis, then those misconceptions can prove deadly.

ye, fischer always had luck

If i win, no.

If my opponent wins, yes.

Gary Player, once world's greatest golf player, was aked if talent or luck plays a role. He said winning is all about luck and the more I practise, the luckier I get.