Optimissed wrote:
sporting .... bet I can guess who.
Yep
Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?
Sort:
Oct 6, 2023
0
#3123
Optimissed wrote:
I've discovered Wild Turkey 81 Bourbon. Got a litre bottle for about £15 in an auction bottled 20 years ago and it's rather good. That was lucky & made me remember I liked Bourbon in the 80s.
I usually drink 101. But 81 is the same with a higher percentage of spring water.
brockblundered wrote:
Wow, this thread has been going for 12 years?
Thats really not very much. Luck in chess has been going on for over 100 times that long.
mouseslips can be a way depending on who mouse slipped
mpaetz wrote:
brianchesscake wrote:
The only reason luck is involved in chess is because humans are machines and so we get tired and emotional so the results of games sometimes depend on if your opponent is playing at 100% or not.
Yet we know that neither patzers nor GMs can play perfectly. Even today's top engines cannot play perfectly. Success/failure results from how much better/worse you play than your opponent. Keeping your concentration at maximum for an extended period is simply another chess-related skill.
I agree that concentration is a skill that you can work on and it's an important factor in chess.
But I'll argue there's luck even there (like in almost anything). You can improve and optimize your neurological function that is reponsible for concentration, but you'll never have 100% control over it. How your brain gets supplied dopamine and norepinephrine can be very unpredictable, therefore focus and alertness is not totally up to you. You can have some games where it's impossible to focus as you would usually. Again where we find randomness, we find luck.
just for clarification, when I said it is based off of skill not luck, your luck chances of winning are based on how good your skills in the game were. I very clearly understand you don't say " good skill" in a game however my point was pointing twoards my claim, as I said earlier. This is not supposed to be read angrily or in a more strict way, this was just me defending my point earlier, seeing as it did not come how i directed it to be.
Yaa I also think that there is such a thing like luck in chess it's all about the day is good or bad for you sometime a noob can also defeat a pro player in chess by his luck
Optimissed wrote:
The greater the skill the greater the luck too. Seems to work both ways. If you play without skill, you can say that your moves are based on luck but that kind of luck is chance. If you play with skill, your good play makes its own luck.
Yeah baby!
Optimissed wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
I've discovered Wild Turkey 81 Bourbon. Got a litre bottle for about £15 in an auction bottled 20 years ago and it's rather good. That was lucky & made me remember I liked Bourbon in the 80s.
I usually drink 101. But 81 is the same with a higher percentage of spring water.
That's why I like it because for something more intense, I prefer Malt Scotch. I also got to like some of the more expensive Canadian whiskies in the 80s. But I have to say that this Wild Turkey 81 is really delicate, with an excellent flavour and it was an really good deal for less than £15. I also got three bottles of 1990s bottled malt in the auction. One's called Glen Ord, which doesn't exist any more, so far as I can see. I'm glad I got that Wild Turkey, which came with a 1990s bottled Teachers, for something like £26 the pair plus commission. I valued the Teachers higher, not knowing Wild Turkey is so good.
yesss
Dec 31, 2023
0
#3131
We're hundreds of pages into this, and I still think at its root this is people talking past each other.
I don't think anyone here is arguing that chess is a game of chance, or that when sore losers say "You were just lucky!" that they have a legitimate point.
However the concept of "luck" is broad and carries more meanings than just randomness. Events that are outside of our control or were unpredictable and fall in our favor are also a kind of luck.
If you could calculate every chess move all the way out to the end of the game, there would be no luck (and also the game would be solved). Since that's not possible, all of us stop calculating at some point, and that means that, necessarily, there are consequences to a decision that we haven't seen yet. And those can be good or bad.
Even a chess computer playing itself can have decisive games for this reason.
There is no such a school yet. It has been a club where players didnt think but instead tried to guess the move. They reached 1200 elo and couldnt more
Tribbled wrote:
We're hundreds of pages into this, and I still think at its root this is people talking past each other.
I don't think anyone here is arguing that chess is a game of chance, or that when sore losers say "You were just lucky!" that they have a legitimate point.
However the concept of "luck" is broad and carries more meanings than just randomness. Events that are outside of our control or were unpredictable and fall in our favor are also a kind of luck.
If you could calculate every chess move all the way out to the end of the game, there would be no luck (and also the game would be solved). Since that's not possible, all of us stop calculating at some point, and that means that, necessarily, there are consequences to a decision that we haven't seen yet. And those can be good or bad.
Even a chess computer playing itself can have decisive games for this reason.
This is correct
Theres 2 reasons why there is still disagreement. Misunderstanding and secondly some have been arguing here too long to finally admit they were wrong.
From my experience, there is a lot of luck in chess, especially at the faster time controls. I cannot tell you how many times I hung a tactic only for me to realize that there is a brilliant counter-tactic in response.
Jan 1, 2024
0
#3136
In an article ‘Impressions and Souvenirs’ about Ostend, 1907 on pages 313-316 of the July 1907 BCM James Mortimer remarked:
‘It is said that in the game of chess luck plays no part whatever. That is a fallacy. In both the championship and the masters’ tournament at Ostend chance, or luck, has been a conspicuous factor, as I shall here proceed to prove ...
No such thing as luck in the game of chess. What nonsense. I have been myself unlucky enough to suffer from insomnia during the greater part of this tournament and, as it happens, am the direct cause of luck to others.’
‘It is said that in the game of chess luck plays no part whatever. That is a fallacy. In both the championship and the masters’ tournament at Ostend chance, or luck, has been a conspicuous factor, as I shall here proceed to prove ...
No such thing as luck in the game of chess. What nonsense. I have been myself unlucky enough to suffer from insomnia during the greater part of this tournament and, as it happens, am the direct cause of luck to others.’
Yes. You can win a game you are losing if your opponent miscalculates. Mic drop.
Jan 1, 2024
0
#3138
Optimissed wrote:
There is no luck in chess, people who don't resign when I want them to are bad people, but not half as bad as people who don't say good game. People who say good game when they just won are being simply horrid, people who don't accept my offer to play another when they just beat me are losers, and how can there be luck in chess when it's a game of skill?
30 second bullet chess.
Yes
Jan 1, 2024
0
#3140
Optimissed wrote:
the-blonde-cat wrote:
to cut a long story short, if 2 people view an event from totally opposing perspectives, you can no longer say it is lucky.
I don't agree with that. One might say it's lucky and the other might say it isn't.
Or both might say it's lucky. Of course, they could both be wrong.
Wow, this thread has been going for 12 years?