Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?

Shall I write an essay

Okay. So your argument is that any external factors such as a power outage or a player getting shot that causes the game to end and to have the points awarded to one person is to be considered a factor in chess.

My argument is that any external factor like ones mentioned (really up to ones imagination) are situations where chess is actually disrupted and the organizing body has to come up with a solution outside of chess on how to continue or award the points. Chess as a game is defined by the rules and gameplay mechanics. When external disruptions happen the game is effectively paused or invalidated and the resolution is handled administratively and not via the chess principles.

Now I wonder which point of view seems more valid. Feel free to elaborate if I didn't present your point accurately enough.

Yea maybe just a little bit, like when ur opponent mouse slips

Yup, just like in any sport, your chance of winning also depends on what mistakes your opponent makes. 

yeah

Maybe

I have been lucky for sure to win but that is fully the exception

as in I feel lucky if they overlook a blunder or make a bigger blunder

Might have luck, might not

I completely agree.

As expected - some trying to cherrypick external factors in order to pretend there's no internal factors subject to chance and luck.
With emphasis on 'pretend'.

A very efficient pair of posts!
Translation?
'To blazes with objectivity! Lets simplify!'

There is no luck in chess.

Cherry pick? That's what your fellow luck believer decided to argue, external factors. Blame him.

Regarding 'chess' and 'rules of chess' - they are very different.
If 'chess' is defined as 'chess games with clocks' that looks like a very central definition.
Although the dictionary (yes I want to guess) probably defines it as something like 'popular game played with a board consisting of 64 squares in an 8x8 arrangement that starts with 32 pieces with varying power set on the same initial squares in every game. Played between two opponents taking turns to move their pieces which are designated by color'
Yes that could probably be shortened without leaving out any of the details.

He's not my fellow. More like your's. But we'll see.
He is not cherrypicking as badly as you - if he is at all on this one.
But I skip most of his posting.
--------------------------
Chance and luck are part of many things.
They refer to realities of what happens.
They are not 'beliefs'.

But the definition of chess has to be something. If we start including everything in the definition of chess that can affect a game from the outside, that would be one heck of a mess. Concept of chess and its fundamentals are based on the rules and game mechanics, not some platform someone happens to boot it up on.

There are many ways victory/defeat in a game of chess can be decided regardless of what moves are made on the board. A player might be caught consulting Stockfish on their smartphone, a player might assault a TD and be removed from the venue, an IM might be discovered using another players identity to enter the "under 1800" section of a tournament to win significant prize money, a player might be a wanted felon and get arrested at the board, whatever. In most of these cases the fault lies with the player; it is their own actions that earn them the defeat, so they can't complain about their "bad luck".

The most common cause of victory/defeat regardless of the position on the board is loss on time. All players have agreed to abide by the tournament's rules concerning timely play. Most often this is the player's own responsibility. If a player cannot finish the game within the time limits due to an appendicitis attack at the board or computer/phone disconnection the "official" result is failure to complete the game within the prescribed time limit. It is only in these rare instances that I consider luck to have played a part, particularly if the affected player had a winning position at the time.

Yes and these unusual events I believe I addressed in my previous post. Whether it is the players own actions or some random occurence that disrupts the game, in those situations the conditions of a chess game are not fulfilled as we don't have two players anymore. If result cannot be decided via means of chess then they have to resolve the situation some otherway, likely award the win to the remaining player. It is unfortunate and bad luck if you will, but again there is no luck in chess. It's unlucky that you couldn't participate in a chess game, or one of full length anyway. Two different things.