Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?

I dont play poker and throwing a chessboard would be enough for me

Me and my uncle.... Went on down.... South Colorado .... West Texas bound.... (you can add the rest!)

I played poker in Oklahoma City but didn't get to Tulsa, Oklahoma during that trip - which apparently has a lot of poker.
Poker is a lot more 'dangerous' than chess.
In more ways than one.
------------------------
That usually shows when you compare movies featuring chess versus movies featuring poker or other gambling too.
Usuallly.
Exceptions?
The violent movie 'Revolver' with Jason Statham heavily featured chess.
But also had gambling.

sigma sigma boy

Yeah, of course there is luck, such as a misclick (from your opponent) or your opponent doesnt see your threat, its skill/luck

That post is from 14 yrs ago...

Yeah, i know

Please be relavent and kind

what a goodly thing if the children of the world could dwell together in peace

Hello

Please be relevant and kind...

To reiterate:

You do consider the players and the results to be "in game factors".

You do admit that when players obtain success/failure (win/lose) by time expiration it is a real result in a real game.

You concede that there are occasions when such time forfeits are the results of factors other than the skills or actions of the players.

You admit that some such factors perfectly fit the definition of "luck".

Then in those specific games there is luck in chess.

If you wish to exclude any such factors from being "in chess" by definition, that definition is indeed part of your premises and claiming that you have built an unassailable line of logic to reach the conclusion that such "luck in chess" cannot exist is "begging the question".

There are leaps here that dont follow logically, non sequitur.. 'Influenced by' does not equal 'in'. Players ability to influence the game mechanics is an in game factor.. Their ability to influence can be in turn influenced by something outside of the game. You should look for reasoning to your definition of 'in game factors' elsewhere as this alone is not shown to be enough...

No other points were made in this post and the demonstrated dilemmas of your model still remain intact. For instance the example of internet connection that I addressed in my last post.. Its nice and concrete, Id like to hear how that works in your model with the externals being in game factors.

Wins and losses are essential features of chess. Whether or not you wish to consider them "in game factors" (your term, not mine) all chess players think winning/losing is an essential part of the game. Wins by time forfeit, resignation,, expulsion of a contestant for cheating or other unsanctioned behavior, or checkmate all show up as "1" on the scoreboard.

So sometimes a player achieves success "by chance, rather than through one's own actions or abilities". The win has been recorded no matter what the cause. Success was obtained through luck. If luck was not involved, how are such games won/lost?

I understand that you are saying that such success isn't envisioned in the idea of the game, but if we wish to be able to play chess in the actual world we must accept that reality doesn't always conform to our ideals.

"Goodly" is like "bigly", I assume. An affectation taken on to hide less cheery motives and agendas.

So when a baseball game is stopped by an earthquake, that means earthquakes are immediately to be considered a part of baseball, and obviously chess also for the same reason...? Extreme weather, alien invasions, cardiac events...chess can be played underwater, so scuba gear is also a part of chess if the depth requires it. Plane crashes, falling coconuts, intestinal parasites, serial killers and mass shooters, squirrel chittering, neutrinos passing through neurons just so...where does this end, exactly? Name something that is *not* part of chess by this premise.

Chess is the game itself, not anything external, not even tournament rules. clocks or other optional additions. To define it the other way around to the extreme of tying everything that be experienced by a person playing the game makes the definition worthless. You can apply the same vague definition to a stack of pancakes at that point.

(Note that I have included chatgpt information)

In chess, "luck" is generally considered to be a non-factor in the traditional sense. Chess is a pure strategy game, where outcomes are determined by the players’ choices, calculations, and understanding of the game rather than by chance. However, there are several nuances that might make it feel like luck sometimes influences the game, even though it's largely a product of skill and circumstance.

1. Opponent's Mistakes or Blunders:
One of the most common situations where players might feel like luck is involved is when an opponent blunders, making an unexpected mistake that turns the game in your favor. In this sense, it may feel like "luck" if you capitalize on an error that your opponent didn’t intend. However, this can usually be explained by:

Psychological Pressure: Under time pressure, stress, or fatigue, players are more likely to make mistakes. If you are able to create complications or put your opponent under stress, they may make mistakes that lead to a favorable outcome for you.

Positional Pressure: Often, luck seems to appear when you put your opponent in a position where they have limited good moves. In these cases, you are controlling the flow of the game, and the blunder is simply the result of your superior planning.

While these blunders might seem like a stroke of luck, they are often the consequence of your own strategic play. Creating complexity or threatening key squares often leads to these "lucky" opportunities.

2. Opening Surprises:
Certain openings or move sequences that catch your opponent off-guard can lead to positions where they are unprepared, and they struggle to find a good plan. This might be perceived as luck if it results in a quick advantage or favorable position early in the game.

However, this type of "luck" is based on preparation and study. The more you understand various openings, the more you can catch opponents off-guard with rare or unexpected lines. A well-prepared player can often lead their opponent into uncomfortable positions, and while this feels like "luck," it’s more accurately the result of their hard work and understanding of the game.

3. Time Pressure and Blitz:
In faster-paced formats like blitz or bullet chess, the concept of "luck" often comes up because players are forced to move rapidly, sometimes leading to mistakes under the ticking clock. When an opponent is low on time, they may make rushed decisions, leaving you with an opportunity to capitalize on their mistakes.

Again, this is more about managing time effectively and understanding the psychology of fast games than actual luck. If you are calm and composed under time pressure while your opponent panics, it may feel like luck, but in reality, it’s more about your ability to stay focused and calculate efficiently.

4. The Element of Randomness in Online Chess (Server Issues, Connection Drops, etc.):
Sometimes, external factors such as server problems, internet connection issues, or even glitches can impact a game. If these interruptions affect the game, they can feel like "luck," especially if they cause one player to lose or gain a winning position. While these things aren’t inherent to chess itself, they are part of the online playing environment, and they can influence outcomes in a way that’s outside the players’ control.

Again, this is external to the game itself, and in a physical over-the-board game, there would be no such random interference.

5. Endgame Scenarios and "Fortuitous" Outcomes:
Sometimes, a player may seem to have a lost position but manages to escape due to an unlikely sequence of moves, leading to a draw or even a win. These situations often arise when a player has a deeper understanding of endgame techniques, or when the opponent makes a mistake in a complex or tricky endgame.

While it might seem like "luck," these situations are the result of endgame knowledge, accurate calculation, and an understanding of key concepts like opposition, zugzwang, and the promotion of pawns. What might look like luck is often just a player’s knowledge of key theoretical positions allowing them to save a seemingly lost game.

6. The Role of "Luck" in the Long-Term:
In the short term, players might feel like luck factors into specific games. However, over the course of a series of games or a tournament, pure luck tends to even out. The better player is likely to win more frequently in the long run, as chess favors skill, knowledge, and preparation.

In other words, in individual games, "luck" might determine the outcome in rare cases, but over many games, skill dominates. This is why strong players consistently perform well in tournaments—they are not relying on luck, but on deep understanding and the ability to make the best decisions in any position.

Conclusion:
While luck can occasionally appear to play a role in chess, especially in the form of opponent blunders, external factors, or surprising moments in the game, the essence of chess is based on skill, strategy, and calculation. Even in situations where luck seems to have a hand, it often stems from tactical or positional factors that are a result of one player’s superior play.

Thus, chess is fundamentally a game of skill, and luck, if it appears at all, is typically a byproduct of the broader competitive environment rather than the game itself. Strong players know that consistent, high-level play comes from deep understanding, preparation, and calculation, not from relying on random outcomes or fortunate coincidences.

"Again, this is external to the game itself, and in a physical over-the-board game, there would be no such random interference."

As long as two humans play, there is ALWAYS random interference. It's impossible to eliminate all randomness. The design of the game doesn't include luck, but luck always finds it's way into anything people do.

The earthquake did not decide the victor of that World Series game. Extreme weather can put an end to a baseball game, but cannot decide which team wins. Of course tournament rules and clocks are part of those chess games that the contestants agree to play under such conditions, just as computers or smartphones are an essential part of online play.

Should we abide by your definition of chess, there are almost no games of chess being played anywhere anymore, as most are played at tournaments, with some time strictures, or entirely in a server.

If we consider winning an essential part of chess, the proximate cause of victory (success) is part of that particular chess game. Should that cause be something other than the players' moves it is possible that luck has played a part.