Probably but it would have to be a rare case... Unless you're talking about brilliant move chances or chances of your opponent blundering, but you can only control your move, which is skill, and you can't choose what your opponent does, that's based on their skill and choice, so no I don't believe luck is involved, but I do think there's a slight chance of a secenerio with luck. (not blunders)
Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?
Sort:
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3564
Cozillion wrote:
Good question.
Wdym? Also, that's kinda basic tbh.
Optimissed wrote:
OctopusOnSteroids wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
What a name you have there!
I think chess as a game and as a concept has to be considered something that could exist in a vacuum. It could exist in a reality, where no humans or environment exists and it is played by two Gods. Or computers as you said. In that case, would there be luck involved? I think we can say not, and this is a logical test that answers the question of whether there luck in chess, or is the luck part of something external to chess. Like humans and the world we live in.
I quoted the wrong post but whatever.
That's fine.
Regarding your point, I can't agree because you've chosen a form of chess which is presumably without luck being involved and then said "there's no luck in chess".
There's no milk in an empty milk bottle!
That's a decent argument. But I didn't choose a form of chess, because the form of chess cannot change. Chess is a game with a set of rules. Who interacts with chess can vary, which can bring external factors that interact with chess. Like luck. Or chest hair. But those are properties that are a part of the entity that interacts with the game, not a part of the game. We don't say "chess sucks because there can be chest hair in it!". We should treat luck the same way, as an external property of the player. Does that make sense?
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3566
Optimissed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Probably but it would have to be a rare case... Unless you're talking about brilliant move chances or chances of your opponent blundering, but you can only control your move, which is skill, and you can't choose what your opponent does, that's based on their skill and choice, so no I don't believe luck is involved, but I do think there's a slight chance of a secenerio with luck. (not blunders)
For whatever reason we might invent, it's the winning move due to something neither of you saw. You say that's not luck? Bad luck for you, though.
"I don't believe luck is involved" - Me. Bro are you slow? Look at the words before that, I clearly said in a situation that your opponent blunders, then I said that in Chess overall there might be a chance of luck but not in blunders. Read between the lines bruh.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3567
Optimissed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Probably but it would have to be a rare case... Unless you're talking about brilliant move chances or chances of your opponent blundering, but you can only control your move, which is skill, and you can't choose what your opponent does, that's based on their skill and choice, so no I don't believe luck is involved, but I do think there's a slight chance of a secenerio with luck. (not blunders)
For whatever reason we might invent, it's the winning move due to something neither of you saw. You say that's not luck? Bad luck for you, though.
Also, your last statement makes no sense, "winning move" the winning move is found by SKILL, not LUCK, yes accidental mates happen, but there's still probably an idea for why the player played that, but either way there's NO luck involved. Luck is a concept by itself, taking my opinion and giving your own cliche response to what I said is kinda lame. Also what move that neither of us saw, who's us? What bad luck, oh! Missing a winning move, bro stop we all make mistakes, that's not bad luck that's a chance to learn, and stop making weird ahh senerios that make you look like a joke.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3568
Also, another commenter named "Octopus on Steroids" was also critiqued by you. You don't need to respond to everything. Play some chess, calm down bruh!
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3569
@Optimissed
Lol, I was looking at the other pages in this forum, you legit have beef with everyone.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3570
Chess is a game of perfect information.
(look that up on Wikipedia)
There is no such thing as luck
(look that up on Wikipedia)
There is no such thing as luck
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3571
SacrifycedStoat wrote:
Chess is a game of perfect information.
(look that up on Wikipedia)
There is no such thing as luck
(look that up on Wikipedia)
There is no such thing as luck
YES, you're so right! I was wondering why no YouTuber had one of those chess shorts about luck, or a famous game with this "luck element."
Luck always favours the brave
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3573
"Unpleasantness" Bro, it's their opinion, I like the way you challenge it, but doing it to lots of people is a bit much, but now that you bring it up that it's disturbing to you, that's kind of one-sided, it's their opinion, you can change their view, but you can't call someone unpleasant because of what they think (unless it's rather gross) but this is no exception.
Also this is a tad unrelated, Optimissed, did you see my other comments on page 239?
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3574
Optimissed wrote:
SacrifycedStoat wrote:
Chess is a game of perfect information.(look that up on Wikipedia)There is no such thing as luck
It isn't a game of perfect information because no-one is capable of using the information perfectly.
In reality, perfect information is perfectly clear and understandable. If you look at a complex chess psotion, you won't understand it. If you try to analyse the start position fully even with the aid of the most powerful computers, it can't be done. Obviously, luck exists, but you could look that up too.
Look up reality on Wiki?
Nothing is perfect. And you can't argue with SacrifycedStoat because they have a mostly reliable source.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3575
Optimissed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
"Unpleasantness" Bro, it's their opinion, I like the way you challenge it, but doing it to lots of people is a bit much, but now that you bring it up that it's disturbing to you, that's kind of one-sided, it's their opinion, you can change their view, but you can't call someone unpleasant because of what they think (unless it's rather gross) but this is no exception.
Also this is a tad unrelated, Optimissed, did you see my other comments on page 239?
Nope, they hurt more people than you realize. It is not about their opinions but about the way they break the rules here to attack the opinions of others. They can't hurt me but they hurt a lot of others and I get a lot of messages telling me that. I tell them to use the report feature but in reality the mods are incapable of sorting this out because it's a mess created by c.c itself.
"attack the opinions of others" If you count yourself that's true. Who's gotten hurt by this? They're only objecting you because you started it, and if they send hateful messages towards you out of spite and not for the mistakes you're doing, then yes I agree, but besides that you don't need to say "I don't agree" to every post bro.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3576
Optimissed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Probably but it would have to be a rare case... Unless you're talking about brilliant move chances or chances of your opponent blundering, but you can only control your move, which is skill, and you can't choose what your opponent does, that's based on their skill and choice, so no I don't believe luck is involved, but I do think there's a slight chance of a secenerio with luck. (not blunders)
For whatever reason we might invent, it's the winning move due to something neither of you saw. You say that's not luck? Bad luck for you, though.
Also, your last statement makes no sense, "winning move" the winning move is found by SKILL, not LUCK, yes accidental mates happen, but there's still probably an idea for why the player played that, but either way there's NO luck involved. Luck is a concept by itself, taking my opinion and giving your own cliche response to what I said is kinda lame. Also what move that neither of us saw, who's us? What bad luck, oh! Missing a winning move, bro stop we all make mistakes, that's not bad luck that's a chance to learn, and stop making weird ahh senerios that make you look like a joke.
What you say is just dogma.
The winning move can be a move made by accident which you then find out leads to a win. Has it never happened to you? Obviously that's lucky.
"Luck is a concept" Remember that? That statement proves that what I'm saying is an opinion based on yours, saying what happened to me when I get a "lucky" win is only your belief of luck. And to answer your question, yes I have gotten accidental wins (checkmate)
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3578
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Also, what's dogma?
I've heard of sigma, though.
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3579
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Also, what's dogma?
A film you should watch: https://youtu.be/-8UW-O-rhv0?si=BneRGl3Uwrr8rGcn
Jan 5, 2025
0
#3580
Ziryab wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
Also, what's dogma?
A film you should watch: https://youtu.be/-8UW-O-rhv0?si=BneRGl3Uwrr8rGcn
Yo, thx!
Any such thing as Luck in chess?
Yes - but depends on definitions of luck and also views of things in general.
Randomness versus order. Pre-determination. Random pre-determination.
Pre-determination by design. No total control.
Views vary greatly on such things.
What is this mumble jumble about depends on definition, this view, that view? No it doesn't. We rigorously analyse the definitions and views on luck and find out which one logically fits chess in respect to other games and events where we agree luck exists. There is no luck in chess because the game is simply deterministic and the rules dont allow luck anyhow. Outcomes are determined by strictly skill. A meteor can strike during the game but thats not a part of chess. That means luck happened in life during a game of chess. The chess game doesnt get finished according to the rules.
So your idea is that if we all accept your definitions of "luck" and "chess" the question will be easily answered? The precise nature and parameters of these terms is the crux of the disagreements here.
If we go by the original English definition of "luck" (taken from Old Dutch) that it is financial gain, then there obviously IS luck in chess--notice there are prizes in tournaments, masters charging for lessons, etc. And if we consider "chess" to be two players having a contest, then a heart attack causing one player to lose on time does mean luck determined the outcome of that game.