Theres luck when your enemy doesnt takie your quenn for free lol
Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?
Sort:
Optimissed wrote:
BigChessplayer665 wrote:
I wonder why optimissie is ignoring me also I believe there is a least (some) luck in chess the shorter the time control the more luck plus the worse they(you) are the more you have to use luck to win games
Am I ignoring you? How come I even got a reminder for this thread since I unfollowed it?
Didn't think you'd adressed me. But why talk to these people? Either they're trolls or have no brains. Think it's both, more than likely.
er you are good at describing yourself
obserwujeciekaczka wrote:
Theres luck when your enemy doesnt takie your quenn for free lol
Once again, that is not luck. That is a lack of skill on the part of your opponent.
Optimissed wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
You are wrong. I said it a total of twice--to you and to Optimissed--just like I said. The need to exaggerate to prove one's point is rarely a sign of great inellect. Just for funsies, give me an example of what you think is luck in chess. just one. but not that black/white thing. we have already covered this.
My iq is completely out of sight to someone like you. It would take someone far more intelligent to understand the evidence for that and you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, ALL the time!! So you wouldn't get ibrust, who makes it sound more complex than it probably needs to be. @Elroch is cleverer than you by a very long way and he doesn't get it but you're roughly Dio's level, which means you can't understand what we're saying. In fact, he's more or less exactly like you, so you should get to know each other. Maybe you already have.
So stop trying to lord it over people here whom you can't hope to compare or compete with. The only reason you think ppl are dumb is because you don't even BEGIN to understand what they're saying. ibrust, imo, is quite intelligent. Put it this way, if I was stuck on a desert island with one of you, if it was you, you'd have to learn VERY quickly to do what I say, if you wanted to survive. I can tell that ibrust would be fine. He would use his intelligence and I wouldn't need to take care of him. It's how people are in real life that counts and not how they shoot their mouths off, making complete fools of themselves on the social media, which is something that you certainly do. Most exprerienced people can tell what you are at a glance.
Also, stop talking about Nietzsche and stop talking about projection. I can tell that you don't know what you're talking about, so leave it out.
I should probably come clean...I have been back from my literal vacation for a few days. Apparent to the observant who have seen my longer replies, but I decided to keep my vacation going virtually as an experiment. The experiment? How long in my absence for you (and ibrust's new account as a bonus) to go full "IQ" on people, and this post fits the bill. I almost said something when Ziryab pointed out you were completely off the rails, but I wanted the full "my IQ towers over the world and that's why I shall never be wrong" effect where you categorically assert that your unique and superior intellect is the sole reason for you being right..
So, this experiment has proven two things:
- You can't even make it 2 weeks without jumping into a phone booth and coming out a megalomaniac.
- I am definitely not the cause of your being...this particular way.
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4346
DiogenesDue wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
You are wrong. I said it a total of twice--to you and to Optimissed--just like I said. The need to exaggerate to prove one's point is rarely a sign of great inellect. Just for funsies, give me an example of what you think is luck in chess. just one. but not that black/white thing. we have already covered this.
My iq is completely out of sight to someone like you. It would take someone far more intelligent to understand the evidence for that and you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, ALL the time!! So you wouldn't get ibrust, who makes it sound more complex than it probably needs to be. @Elroch is cleverer than you by a very long way and he doesn't get it but you're roughly Dio's level, which means you can't understand what we're saying. In fact, he's more or less exactly like you, so you should get to know each other. Maybe you already have.
So stop trying to lord it over people here whom you can't hope to compare or compete with. The only reason you think ppl are dumb is because you don't even BEGIN to understand what they're saying. ibrust, imo, is quite intelligent. Put it this way, if I was stuck on a desert island with one of you, if it was you, you'd have to learn VERY quickly to do what I say, if you wanted to survive. I can tell that ibrust would be fine. He would use his intelligence and I wouldn't need to take care of him. It's how people are in real life that counts and not how they shoot their mouths off, making complete fools of themselves on the social media, which is something that you certainly do. Most exprerienced people can tell what you are at a glance.
Also, stop talking about Nietzsche and stop talking about projection. I can tell that you don't know what you're talking about, so leave it out.
I should probably come clean...I have been back from my literal vacation for a few days. Apparent to the observant who have seen my longer replies, but I decided to keep my vacation going virtually as an experiment. The experiment? How long in my absence for you (and ibrust's new account as a bonus) to go full "IQ" on people, and this post fits the bill. I almost said something when Ziryab pointed out you were completely off the rails, but I wanted the full "my IQ towers over the world and that's why I shall never be wrong" effect where you categorically assert that your unique and superior intellect is the sole reason for you being right..
So, this experiment has proven two things:
- You can't even make it 2 weeks without jumping into a phone booth and coming out a megalomaniac.
- I am definitely not the cause of your being...this particular way.
Did you actually think you might be the cause of anyone being a particular way? And Optimissed is supposed to be the megalomaniac (whatever that means)?
DiogenesDue wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
You are wrong. I said it a total of twice--to you and to Optimissed--just like I said. The need to exaggerate to prove one's point is rarely a sign of great inellect. Just for funsies, give me an example of what you think is luck in chess. just one. but not that black/white thing. we have already covered this.
My iq is completely out of sight to someone like you. It would take someone far more intelligent to understand the evidence for that and you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, ALL the time!! So you wouldn't get ibrust, who makes it sound more complex than it probably needs to be. @Elroch is cleverer than you by a very long way and he doesn't get it but you're roughly Dio's level, which means you can't understand what we're saying. In fact, he's more or less exactly like you, so you should get to know each other. Maybe you already have.
So stop trying to lord it over people here whom you can't hope to compare or compete with. The only reason you think ppl are dumb is because you don't even BEGIN to understand what they're saying. ibrust, imo, is quite intelligent. Put it this way, if I was stuck on a desert island with one of you, if it was you, you'd have to learn VERY quickly to do what I say, if you wanted to survive. I can tell that ibrust would be fine. He would use his intelligence and I wouldn't need to take care of him. It's how people are in real life that counts and not how they shoot their mouths off, making complete fools of themselves on the social media, which is something that you certainly do. Most exprerienced people can tell what you are at a glance.
Also, stop talking about Nietzsche and stop talking about projection. I can tell that you don't know what you're talking about, so leave it out.
I should probably come clean...I have been back from my literal vacation for a few days. Apparent to the observant who have seen my longer replies, but I decided to keep my vacation going virtually as an experiment. The experiment? How long in my absence for you (and ibrust's new account as a bonus) to go full "IQ" on people, and this post fits the bill. I almost said something when Ziryab pointed out you were completely off the rails, but I wanted the full "my IQ towers over the world and that's why I shall never be wrong" effect where you categorically assert that your unique and superior intellect is the sole reason for you being right..
So, this experiment has proven two things:
- You can't even make it 2 weeks without jumping into a phone booth and coming out a megalomaniac.
- I am definitely not the cause of your being...this particular way.
That is an interesting exercise. And I am not too experienced in forum participation, but it seems to me that while they seem aligned @optimissed and @ibrust are very different from each other. I'm guessing most people recognize that @optimissed is just trolling. Its hard to believe anyone could take his douche baggery to such a sublime level without trying. @ibrust, on the other hand, actually thinks he is the smartest person on any forum. pure unadulterated narcissism.
shadowtanuki wrote:
DiogenesDue wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
You are wrong. I said it a total of twice--to you and to Optimissed--just like I said. The need to exaggerate to prove one's point is rarely a sign of great inellect. Just for funsies, give me an example of what you think is luck in chess. just one. but not that black/white thing. we have already covered this.
My iq is completely out of sight to someone like you. It would take someone far more intelligent to understand the evidence for that and you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, ALL the time!! So you wouldn't get ibrust, who makes it sound more complex than it probably needs to be. @Elroch is cleverer than you by a very long way and he doesn't get it but you're roughly Dio's level, which means you can't understand what we're saying. In fact, he's more or less exactly like you, so you should get to know each other. Maybe you already have.
So stop trying to lord it over people here whom you can't hope to compare or compete with. The only reason you think ppl are dumb is because you don't even BEGIN to understand what they're saying. ibrust, imo, is quite intelligent. Put it this way, if I was stuck on a desert island with one of you, if it was you, you'd have to learn VERY quickly to do what I say, if you wanted to survive. I can tell that ibrust would be fine. He would use his intelligence and I wouldn't need to take care of him. It's how people are in real life that counts and not how they shoot their mouths off, making complete fools of themselves on the social media, which is something that you certainly do. Most exprerienced people can tell what you are at a glance.
Also, stop talking about Nietzsche and stop talking about projection. I can tell that you don't know what you're talking about, so leave it out.
I should probably come clean...I have been back from my literal vacation for a few days. Apparent to the observant who have seen my longer replies, but I decided to keep my vacation going virtually as an experiment. The experiment? How long in my absence for you (and ibrust's new account as a bonus) to go full "IQ" on people, and this post fits the bill. I almost said something when Ziryab pointed out you were completely off the rails, but I wanted the full "my IQ towers over the world and that's why I shall never be wrong" effect where you categorically assert that your unique and superior intellect is the sole reason for you being right..
So, this experiment has proven two things:
- You can't even make it 2 weeks without jumping into a phone booth and coming out a megalomaniac.
- I am definitely not the cause of your being...this particular way.
Did you actually think you might be the cause of anyone being a particular way? And Optimissed is supposed to be the megalomaniac (whatever that means)?
Control freak , narcissist ,self absorbed ,ect
shadowtanuki wrote:
Did you actually think you might be the cause of anyone being a particular way? And Optimissed is supposed to be the megalomaniac (whatever that means)?
He has asserted it many times, that he is merely reacting to others (each person in turn that he goes after) and is as sweet as a kitten by default. Clearly disproven.
Optimissed wrote:
EMMA-GROSS wrote:
I say, there can be luck involved in chess because sometimes you can accidentally move a piece and gain a check or checkmate for the opponent
That's pretty much right.
I've had three or four candidate moves, whittled them down to two, thought for ten minutes, decided on a move and then made the move I rejected. OK so maybe my unconscious mind saw that the move I rejected actually won but I've been in that situation in a tournament and won the game because of that. No-one can prove that was skill and not just a silly error made because I was tired and therefore luck.
The idea that there's no luck in chess is just a childish idea based on a kind of fantasy that because chess is a game of skill, there can be no luck involved. I'd suggest that you have to be a child to believe it.
thx for quoting me
HELLOOOOOOOOOO
I AM 15 YEARS OLD
Tempetown wrote:
That is an interesting exercise. And I am not too experienced in forum participation, but it seems to me that while they seem aligned @optimissed and @ibrust are very different from each other. I'm guessing most people recognize that @optimissed is just trolling. Its hard to believe anyone could take his douche baggery to such a sublime level without trying. @ibrust, on the other hand, actually thinks he is the smartest person on any forum. pure unadulterated narcissism.
The difference you see is cosmetic. Optimissed has been forced to change his behavior somewhat over time. He is no longer able to post about his "169 IQ" without some level of self-scrutiny, which was definitely not the case years ago. I won't break out the long list of links, but here's a couple of representative ones that speak directly to his view of self, one from way back and one more recently...
I don't want to drag him through the muck at the moment, but you should be aware that everything you ascribed to ibrust is there in spades.
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4353
DiogenesDue wrote:
playerafar wrote:
Its suggested today by a good member that skill and luck are separate.
A premise.
Seeming to argue that wherever skill applies or happens to apply that luck could not also apply.
That does not follow from what I said. You leapt one lilypad too far. There are plenty of games with skill and luck intrinsic to them. Chess is not one of them. Remove humans for engines (or theoretical perfect players) and the luck immediately disappears.
If that's the argument - I wouldn't agree with it.
Skill and luck cannot overlap?
Cannot have a grey area between them?
I wouldn't agree with either of those either.
That's good because those would be straw men if you went down that road.
And in activities where two opponents compete against each other - luck factors might actually be Increased rather than decreased.
Including internally.
Skill factors? That too.
That's Dio's reply to an earlier post by me.
I did say 'seeming' ...
Point: the word 'intrinsic' ...
'intrinsic to the game'.
That word 'intrinsic' could be discussed a bit.
At the current state of the forum I don't think Optimissed and Dio going at it can make things much worse. Anyway, one thinks he's the most intelligent person in the world and my man here keeps a post catalogue (long one apparently) of his nemesis saved on his computer. 
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4355
Tempetown wrote:
playerafar wrote:
I agree chess is a game of perfect information too.
But - its also not solved. Which has various implications.
whether it is 'solved' or not is immaterial. no human being will ever carry perfect information in their head.
Hi TT !
Your second sentence is close to the reality ...
but its also part of the reason there's luck in the game.
But on that we'll disagree.
But I'd probably back you in a heartbeat over some of the people here who happen to agree with me about the 'luck' thing.
Because of their way at going at forums.
Fortunately they tend to get muted and blocked or posted around or 'exposed'. But not always enough.
OctopusOnSteroids wrote:
At the current state of the forum I don't think Optimissed and Dio going at it can make things much worse. Anyway, one thinks he's the most intelligent person in the world and my man here keeps a post catalogue (long one apparently) of his nemesis saved on his computer.
Propose a better way for reminding someone of the actual things they have said for over a decade when they assert they have never said X or Y or held Z opinion. If I could force feed him Omega-3 fatty acids with his oatmeal daily, maybe that would be better...but I cannot.
I did not keep links from him when I started running into him in 2014. That was an evolution over the course of years to deal with the blatant misstatements and fabrications. It became a pain in the posterior to have to dig back and show him what he actually said when he would forget. So, the links are a model of efficiency on this front. I make no apologies for them.
Maybe a decade from now you will understand the reasoning...and I think these past 2 weeks have made it fairly clear that it's Optimissed and [insert any poster here that dares to disagree] that "go at it". Let's not forget that on any professionally moderated forum Optimissed would have been banned after the first half dozen mutes, and there would be no need to keep engaging with him year after year while he pollutes any topic that he thinks will show him in an intellectually positive light.
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4357
OctopusOnSteroids wrote:
At the current state of the forum I don't think Optimissed and Dio going at it can make things much worse. Anyway, one thinks he's the most intelligent person in the world and my man here keeps a post catalogue (long one apparently) of his nemesis saved on his computer.
Somebody worried and jealous about the Guy and Dio 'going at it'.
Nothing new there.
And he's only got two arms not eight.
And he complains - sometimes bitterly - but chooses to be here.
A decade?
Yes the reasoning perhaps but he'll have forgotten his complaining long before then.
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4358
Tempetown wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
ibrust777 wrote:
Tempetown wrote:
I prematurely accused optimiissed or whatever his name is of being the perfect embodiment of the dunning-kruger effect. but than i met you.
You've said this I think 3 or 4 times to different people at this point.
The inability to followup a claim with deductive reasoning leading to a conclusion is rarely a sign of a great intellect.
I believe it was Nietzsche who thought all statements had to be a form of projection on some level. In your case the projection is very strong and obvious to everyone besides you.
You are wrong. I said it a total of twice--to you and to Optimissed--just like I said. The need to exaggerate to prove one's point is rarely a sign of great inellect. Just for funsies, give me an example of what you think is luck in chess. just one. but not that black/white thing. we have already covered this.
My iq is completely out of sight to someone like you. It would take someone far more intelligent to understand the evidence for that and you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, ALL the time!! So you wouldn't get ibrust, who makes it sound more complex than it probably needs to be. @Elroch is cleverer than you by a very long way and he doesn't get it but you're roughly Dio's level, which means you can't understand what we're saying. In fact, he's more or less exactly like you, so you should get to know each other. Maybe you already have.
So stop trying to lord it over people here whom you can't hope to compare or compete with. The only reason you think ppl are dumb is because you don't even BEGIN to understand what they're saying. ibrust, imo, is quite intelligent. Put it this way, if I was stuck on a desert island with one of you, if it was you, you'd have to learn VERY quickly to do what I say, if you wanted to survive. I can tell that ibrust would be fine. He would use his intelligence and I wouldn't need to take care of him. It's how people are in real life that counts and not how they shoot their mouths off, making complete fools of themselves on the social media, which is something that you certainly do. Most exprerienced people can tell what you are at a glance.
Also, stop talking about Nietzsche and stop talking about projection. I can tell that you don't know what you're talking about, so leave it out.
I never once mentioned Nietzsche or projection, you dumbass. For someone who claims such brilliance, you suck at reading comprehension!
TT - you see how he obsesses about IQ and 'claims superiority'?
Any mystery left in your mind now about who 'the Guy' is?
But Dio always beats him. Dio very very hard on trolling people.
And it can be fun to watch.
The Guy's 'Nirvana' would be to get Dio muted.
He'll look for a double standard against anybody opposing him.
Year in year out.
--------------------------
That's why its great when chess.com gives the Guy three-month mutes and when he's blocked by good posters.
Breaks his bubble of phony authority and imaginary superiority.
Provided people find out that keeps happening.
You're getting familiar with ibrust and his problems right?
Take ibrust's problems and multiply them by 100. Then you've got ...
That's right.
---------------------
And Dio has raised a point about 'intrinsic to the game' ...
maybe that should get some more attention (not talking about 'nasal' attention from the Guy though)
@DiogenesDue
What I would propose to both of you and Optimissed. Dont bother responding to each other. If there is substance to be discussed its not worth it having the exchanges.
I've taken this advice with playerafar who I cant seem to shake off even though I stopped reacting to his nonsense.
Jan 30, 2025
0
#4360
OctopusOnSteroids wrote:
@DiogenesDue
What I would propose to both of you and Optimissed. Dont bother responding to each other. If there is substance to be discussed its not worth it having the exchanges.
I've taken this advice with playerafar who I cant seem to shake off even though I stopped reacting to his nonsense.
Octo now proving my point about his complaining.
Blundering into his repeating of 'phony equivalency' between the two people whose exchanges he keeps complaining about.
He would do better to concentrate on Dio's suggestion about 'intrinsic to the game'
is this all because of me?