A point about the Fischer boom:
USCF membership 1974--60,000
USCF membership today--93,00.
Not to mention that chess has boomed into millions of players on India and China where nobody cares about Fischer.
Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?
Sort:
CooloutAC wrote:
No my friend. Chess was never as popular as in the time of Fischer. Gary Kasparov has said as much when visiting his grave site. It wa sthe height of Chess popularity. He revolutionized the whole game. Lets it put this way, everyone in America was watching chess on tv during that time, everyone talked about it. In my life time though, and in my parents life time, we have never even knew anyone that played chess. Never talked about it, even though people own chess boards and have learned as children how to move the pieces., we never played it. Although in the parks here in queens we would see the chess tables that were built in the 60s, that people just ate lunch on. Never once have i ever seen anyone playiong chess on any of those chess tables all throughout brooklyn and queens at the parks I've gone to. Growing up here in NYC the only time I see people playing chess is in the movies. And I've been a part of the parks department lol.
If it wasn't for the netflix series, or covid, or online chess websites like this. I wouldn't even started playing 6 months ago myself. And that boon is already fading fast my friend.
Now you can lie to yourself and tell yourself otherwise, just like you lie to yourself when you say there are elements of luck in chess. When most of society, especially Americans, know this not to be true. But when people like you claim otherwise, they lose respect for you and the community you are a part of.
Do you understand what this sentence means:
"Chess is probably more popular in the 2020s than at any time since Fischer"
This is why you tell people they flip-flop and are walking contradictions. You just spent a paragraph telling me that the popularity of chess has never been higher than it was in the Fischer era...not even understanding that my sentence above means the exact same thing.
You also tried to say I am a proponent of the idea that there's luck in chess. Quite obviously not the case. My position has been that chess is as skill-based as a game can get. It was my position before you ever started playing, and it will still be my position long after you have inevitably moved on to some other community to find new people who don't know you are, having exhausted every ounce of goodwill here. Let's collectively hope it fades sooner than later.
CooloutAC escribió:
btickler wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
I think anyone's condescending attitude that helps keep chess unpopular is extremely shameful. Many of you don't even realize it from the 100s of years of indoctrination in the communities that have programmed you. Are you and mpaetz kids? Don't teach kids how to be fake. Shame on you. I don't believe you are a military man. I think its all a lie.
Chess is not unpopular, though. That's just in your head.
- Chess is probably more popular in the 2020s than at any time since Fischer.
- You don't seem to know anything about indoctrination, or communities, or chess for that matter.
- Shaming people, calling them liars, etc. is something you do because those are the weapons you feel have been the most hurtful in your personal experience.
- Escalating the rhetoric reeks of desperation...nobody is taking food out of baby's mouths by discussing luck in chess on a website...you might want to come back to earth
I don't really care if you are convinced about my background. Why would I be?
No my friend. Chess was never as popular as in the time of Fischer. Gary Kasparov has said as much when visiting his grave site. It wa sthe height of Chess popularity. He revolutionized the whole game. Lets it put this way, everyone in America was watching chess on tv during that time, everyone talked about it. In my life time though, and in my parents life time, we have never even knew anyone that played chess. Never talked about it, even though people own chess boards and have learned as children how to move the pieces., we never played it. Although in the parks here in queens we would see the chess tables that were built in the 60s, that people just ate lunch on. Never once have i ever seen anyone playiong chess on any of those chess tables all throughout brooklyn and queens at the parks I've gone to. Growing up here in NYC the only time I see people playing chess is in the movies. And I've been a part of the parks department lol.
If it wasn't for the netflix series, or covid, or online chess websites like this. I wouldn't even started playing 6 months ago myself. And that boon is already fading fast my friend.
Now you can lie to yourself and tell yourself otherwise, just like you lie to yourself when you say there are elements of luck in chess. When most of society, especially Americans, know this not to be true. But when people like you claim otherwise, they lose respect for you and the community you are a part of.
Wtf?!
Optimissed wrote:
Eseles wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
mpaetz wrote:
If player A, a strong player, has a winnable position that both contestants know he will easily convert 95% of the time but he makes bad mistake, that's poor play on his part and he deserves a poor result. Player B would be justified in saying "I got lucky."
That's exactly right. If A would win most of the time and B didn't do anything exceptional, to force a blunder, then B would say he was lucky. That's because he didn't do anything to deserve the stroke of luck. A wouldn't say he was unlucky and he wasn't, because he just blundered. This is one of the many ways in which luck exists in chess. It should be so obvious that luck exists in chess (and it is very obvious to most people) that only an exceptional person might claim it doesn't, on some kind of ideological grounds.
Neither a mistake nor taking advantage of a mistake can be attributed to luck - chess is a game of pure skill and intellect. Ironic that intelligent chess players can't realize that
Hi, in my opinion, the belief that there can be no luck in chess is like saying there can be no luck ever in life, because living is a skill etc. It seems that people hold the idea that luck doesn't exist on ideological grounds although some, I suppose, believe in determinism, so for them there's no such thing as luck in the universe.
Why do you equate chess with life, lol?
Unfollowing...
May 8, 2022
0
#767
There are things in life that no human ingenuity or skill or planning can control. An outdoor country music was attacked by madman, killing dozens and wounding many more. The survivors weren:t more skillful at dodging bullets than the dead.The gunman was firing randomly into the crowd. Life and death was a matter of luck.
Random events happen in life. Chess is part of life. So it is no surprise that there is the possibility that luck can sometimes affect a chess game.
May 8, 2022
0
#768
Yes and no: There is when it comes to being matched with someone you can beat, but no when it comes to actual gameplay.
CooloutAC wrote:
But you aren't agreeing with me. Your sentence is literally the opposite of chess's popularity being at its height during the time of Fischer. Something is very wrong with you my friend. Very wrong.... . You literally said the only element of luck in chess is randomly chosen colors and were debating Lee Euler. Now you have taken the opposite side of the argument to troll me. If you truly are a vet, go get help at the VA immediately
I supposed other posters find it funny not to correct you here. Nevertheless, the sentence's meaning is clear.
You just admitted I do not believe in any luck in chess other than initial color selection, but you cannot produce anything I've said to contradict that...sooo...where's the flip/flop?
The VA is just something else you know nothing about.
May 8, 2022
0
#770
I am sure a person only is called lucky because a person does not want to admit they are good at a certain thing.
btickler escribió:
CooloutAC wrote:
But you aren't agreeing with me. Your sentence is literally the opposite of chess's popularity being at its height during the time of Fischer. Something is very wrong with you my friend. Very wrong.... . You literally said the only element of luck in chess is randomly chosen colors and were debating Lee Euler. Now you have taken the opposite side of the argument to troll me. If you truly are a vet, go get help at the VA immediately
I supposed other posters find it funny not to correct you here. Nevertheless, the sentence's meaning is clear.
What's the point? He's well aware of it. He's just a troll.
CooloutAC wrote:
others can read the thread and judge for thsemelves. But I see you deflecting, once again, from your previous post which is you conceding that point bud. You did not agree with me that Bobby Fischer was champion during the height of chess's popularity, your sentence actually contradicted it. And I think you have mental problems when you tried to claim it states the opposite. Noone is going to correct me on that, because its absolutely stunning how you claim otherwise. wow. What I do know, is that the VA has mental health programs you can possibly benefit from.
Mental health programs *are* something I would believe you have experience with...
Pulpofeira wrote:
What's the point? He's well aware of it. He's just a troll.
The trolling is certainly not in question.
May 9, 2022
0
#776
CooloutAC wrote
To relate this to your flawed belief there is luck in chess. It would be like you saying gunmen shooting people are part of country music concerts. Its not, as you already admitted its an unconnected and rare occurrence. Its another example of someone desperately reaching for a ludicrous example that has nothing to do with the game of chess. Proving your own argument wrong when you can't come up with an example based on chess itself. With your twisted logic you can call anything luck. But that shows you are unable to distinguish the difference not only between sports and non sports, between skill and luck, but also between luck designed in games and unrelated luck in life.
Mass murder WAS part of that particular country music concert. None of the organizers, performers or spectators planned on it happening or had the slightest idea that it would happen. Still, some were killed or wounded. The same applies to the innocent passers-by killed or wounded in gang shootouts. They were unluckily in the wrong place at the wrong time. The same applies to the power failures or heart attacks that can decide the outcomes of chess games.
These are indeed rare occurrances, but they DO happen. The fact that such things are rare doesn't mean they don't exist. Chess is played by real people in the real world and sometimes reality our little gaming activity. You can't say skill had anything to do with these things, and you always say that luck is the opposite of skill, they are just bad luck.
May 9, 2022
0
#777
Do you believe that incident was fake news? That those people are still alive? Do you deny that mass murder took place at a country music show? Once in a while unanticipated consequences happen, even im chess.
As for the second paragraph of your post, I have never said any of the things you attribute to me. Either you are in dire need of remedial reading classes, or you a total idiot, or you pay no more attention to what you read and write here than you do to your chess games.
May 9, 2022
0
#778
CooloutAC wrote:
None of that matters, and it changes nothing I said. You would be ignorant to say mass murders are part of country music concerts.
You have said all of those things and I consider it as shameful as your desperate, irrelevant and insensitive example of people dying. Shame on you. You need more help then remedial classes.
Again you spread lies and misrepresentations as you have no real answers. You are the only one talking about mass murder being part of country music concerts. I cited one incident, you expanded it to the whole genre. There is a difference between "concert" and "concerts" that the rest of us learned in elementary school but you are unable to understand.
Nor have I ever said luck regularly affects all chess games, it just pops up in a few rare situations.
As for the pathetic lies you use to paint a false picture of my opinions:. this is just your desperate attempt to look like you know what you are talking about when all the facts are against you. Prove what you claim by citing posts where I said what you maintain I did and I will buy you a diamond membership.
May 10, 2022
0
#779
There is a difference between "rare' and "non-existent", and I never said "unconnected", that's just another of your desperate lies. I have repeatedly said that luck only very rarely affects chess. Rare, but it does happen. This appears to be something you have difficulty understanding. I still await proof of any of the nervous fabrications you came up with about what I think.
Outside factors are not IN chess. That is a contradiction. That is luck outside of chess, not specific to chess, and not even part of the discussion which is about distinguishing the difference between games that have elements of luck like poker, and those that don't like chess.
Winning and losing ARE part of chess. Rarely, games are won/lost for reasons unconnected to the players' moves. Them's the breaks.