bailarinadesarda wrote:
Optimissed says he won’t answer and keeps on answering
You have divined a great and awful truth.
Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?
Sort:
Jul 24, 2022
0
#2803
Optimissed wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
This thread has become a contest over yellow liquid and the tools used to send it.
[Eff ng bots]
Tbh though, you have contributed. You reignited it by your very own self.
I have experience with yellow liquid and electric fences. One of those things Boy Scouts do when they are not starting fires.
I believe, now you come to mention it, you did recount a ghastly experience along those lines, a good few years ago. Maybe it could have made a new man of you but the chance wouldn't be worth the risking.
"Pull the lever, Frankenstein". "Not that one!!! "
I may have. Cannot guarantee the details were true. There are several versions of the story, some of which hew closer to the facts than others.
Jul 24, 2022
0
#2804
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day 
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
lfPatriotGames wrote:
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
But couldnt he just use the other hand or am I missing something lol
Kotshmot wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
But couldnt he just use the other hand or am I missing something lol
Yes he could. Just like the 100 meter dash participant could just use his other, non broken, leg.
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Kotshmot wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
But couldnt he just use the other hand or am I missing something lol
Yes he could. Just like the 100 meter dash participant could just use his other, non broken, leg.
You cannot play chess with one hand?
JoeMamaForever420 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Kotshmot wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
But couldnt he just use the other hand or am I missing something lol
Yes he could. Just like the 100 meter dash participant could just use his other, non broken, leg.
You cannot play chess with one hand?
In extreme sports, like chess, the more physical ability the better. Technically it MAY be possible to play chess with one hand, under extreme circumstances. He will need the other hand for balance, to perform other vital functions, like fidgeting, scratching, etc.
But this has more to do with luck I think. The robot can just break the finger of an opponent and claim ignorance. "wasn't me, it was my programmer"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=txXolEyMex8
Allow me to give you a link to a blitz game Alexander Grischuk played against a robot in 2012. At 5:00 the robot makes a capture by putting the piece aside and then lifting the taking piece over onto the emptied square. That's where the boy already is placing his piece to recapture when his finger is hit.
Heartbreaking to watch Grischuk finishing the game slipping like a boxer after the machine came at him at 6:30.
Against a robot with sensorium for board coordinates and moves but not for the person sitting on the other side of the board you are lucky if you go home only with a broken spirit.
lfPatriotGames wrote:
JoeMamaForever420 wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Kotshmot wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
LMBN wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
From what I heard, the kid was fine to play again the next day
That's amazing. As a physical contact sport it's surprising that the body part needed most to move the pieces can still be used the very next day. That's one tough kid.
That would be like a 100 meter dash participant with a broken leg competing the very next day.
But couldnt he just use the other hand or am I missing something lol
Yes he could. Just like the 100 meter dash participant could just use his other, non broken, leg.
You cannot play chess with one hand?
In extreme sports, like chess, the more physical ability the better. Technically it MAY be possible to play chess with one hand, under extreme circumstances. He will need the other hand for balance, to perform other vital functions, like fidgeting, scratching, etc.
But this has more to do with luck I think. The robot can just break the finger of an opponent and claim ignorance. "wasn't me, it was my programmer"
Using both hands to move pieces is illegal
Aug 15, 2022
0
#2812
There’s no luck in the play of the game itself, but I just won a game in which my opponent had a checkmate move and just didn’t see it. So I was lucky to win. Almost feel bad because I deserved to lose. But not quite.
calbitt5750 wrote:
There’s no luck in the play of the game itself, but I just won a game in which my opponent had a checkmate move and just didn’t see it. So I was lucky to win. Almost feel bad because I deserved to lose. But not quite.
It's already been established that there is luck in the play of the game. There is no luck in the rules of the game, but in the play of the game itself, there is at least some luck. For all the reasons already mentioned.
Aug 16, 2022
0
#2814
lfPatriotGames wrote:
calbitt5750 wrote:
There’s no luck in the play of the game itself, but I just won a game in which my opponent had a checkmate move and just didn’t see it. So I was lucky to win. Almost feel bad because I deserved to lose. But not quite.
It's already been established that there is luck in the play of the game. There is no luck in the rules of the game, but in the play of the game itself, there is at least some luck. For all the reasons already mentioned.
I got lucky last night.
I was blundering all over the place. My adversary matched each one with their own. In the end, time was on my side.
"Bad luck" is a short term set back that should not gainsay results over a long time. If "bad luck" persists over time it is nothing to do with "luck" but a fundamental failing to address chess or life etc
Ziryab wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
calbitt5750 wrote:
There’s no luck in the play of the game itself, but I just won a game in which my opponent had a checkmate move and just didn’t see it. So I was lucky to win. Almost feel bad because I deserved to lose. But not quite.
It's already been established that there is luck in the play of the game. There is no luck in the rules of the game, but in the play of the game itself, there is at least some luck. For all the reasons already mentioned.
I got lucky last night.
I was blundering all over the place. My adversary matched each one with their own. In the end, time was on my side.
But at least one of your moves might not have been a blunder. It's possible one of your moves was recognized as a blunder because that's the limit of understanding right now.
It's possible, even probable, many of us have played moves that are far beyond the ability of even the best computers to recognize as good. We do this when we run out of ideas and have absolutely no idea where to move. So we just make a random move, not knowing what the reults will be. I've done that, and assumed since I didn't know what I was doing, it must be a mistake.
Most likely the majority of my moves ARE mistakes, but it seems the odds are that once in a while a very good move is made, completely by accident.
Aug 16, 2022
0
#2817
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
calbitt5750 wrote:
There’s no luck in the play of the game itself, but I just won a game in which my opponent had a checkmate move and just didn’t see it. So I was lucky to win. Almost feel bad because I deserved to lose. But not quite.
It's already been established that there is luck in the play of the game. There is no luck in the rules of the game, but in the play of the game itself, there is at least some luck. For all the reasons already mentioned.
I got lucky last night.
I was blundering all over the place. My adversary matched each one with their own. In the end, time was on my side.
But at least one of your moves might not have been a blunder. It's possible one of your moves was recognized as a blunder because that's the limit of understanding right now.
It's possible, even probable, many of us have played moves that are far beyond the ability of even the best computers to recognize as good. We do this when we run out of ideas and have absolutely no idea where to move. So we just make a random move, not knowing what the reults will be. I've done that, and assumed since I didn't know what I was doing, it must be a mistake.
Most likely the majority of my moves ARE mistakes, but it seems the odds are that once in a while a very good move is made, completely by accident.
It seems my memory of that game diverges from reality.
Aug 16, 2022
0
#2818
My memory is right. It wasn't the last game, but the one prior. I won on time in a drawn ending after having been mostly outplayed in a blunderfest.
Ziggy_Zugzwang wrote:
"Bad luck" is a short term set back that should not gainsay results over a long time. If "bad luck" persists over time it is nothing to do with "luck" but a fundamental failing to address chess or life etc
Well, define "over long time". The existance of odds allow the possibility "bad luck" persisting over a subjectively long period of time, which has no limit. The likelyhood of "unlucky" events happening in a row just decreases over time, but it never dissappears.
Aug 19, 2022
0
#2820
Saying there is luck in chess is like saying there is luck in soccer. Sure, I might be lucky the last defender passed the ball to me and I scored off it, but that's a mistake they made. Same thing in chess. If my opponent makes a blunder or doesn't see my plan until it's too late, it's not luck. What some of y'all are calling luck is the culmination of studying, preparation, mental and physical health, amount of sleep, nutrition, and ability to focus. If one opponent lapses in any of those areas and loses because of it... To call it luck is incognizance.
Well I may have something new.
There is this story from Moscow about a tournament where a robot broke the finger of a child playing chess. This could go two different ways. Some might say that we finally have evidence of physical harm in a chess game, therefore chess is a sport.
But it could also be bad luck. Now the child is injured and can't keep playing. Robots aren't necessary to play chess, but they do play it. I don't know if the child forfeits or the robot forfeits for acting in a violent manner toward the child. But it's interesting at least. A Russian grandmaster, Karjakin, said "This has never happened before".
Which is kinda how luck can sometimes work.
If you ever doubted that playing chess with a robot is sport, then you must read “Moxon’s Master” by Ambrose Bierce.
http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/MoxoMast.shtml