U need to learn albert einsteins quote. That is why It didn't make sense, because my head was already hurting because I didn't understand it.
YOU didn't understand it. I doubt anyone else didn't understand it. Well, other than @AKshath0 backing you up.
Oh! I perfectly got it. That's why I said you made very sensible points. hahahahaha
That was obvious sarcasm.
Like I said, we are in agreement that there is luck in chess.
I said so because Akshath0 was able to explain easily and simply.
But you made too complicated points, and did not understand Albert Einstein's quote.
I explained it easily and simply!
Like I said, we are in agreement that there is luck in chess.
I said so because Akshath0 was able to explain easily and simply.
But you made too complicated points, and did not understand Albert Einstein's quote.
I explained it easily and simply!
You "explained" it very "simply" and very easily, alright?
It's like daycare in here, who let out all the kids? (Lord, I pray they are kids)
This is what you are promoting, Coolout.
They having fun. I love that einstein quote. it really hit home with you hahaha.
No, it didn't, and not just because it's not a real Einstein quote.
Nothing funnier than when somebody making a fool out of themselves unknowingly is laughing at you.
Like I said, we are in agreement that there is luck in chess.
I said so because Akshath0 was able to explain easily and simply.
But you made too complicated points, and did not understand Albert Einstein's quote.
I explained it easily and simply!
You "explained" it very "simply" and very easily, alright?
😡 ENOUGH SARCASM
It is a good message from Einstein that is also attributed to Feynman.
Kasparov seems to like Feynman's (somewhat self-contradictory) quote: "Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel Prize"
I prefer "only make something as complicated as it needs to be" or "make things as simple as possible, but not simpler"
"If you have to attack the quote and not the point, it means that you do not understand the point." - zxasqw1212345
Tell me why this doesn't make sense:
"Luck" simply cannot exist, because when you define something as "lucky", that accusation is based off of your understanding of the event right after it happened. Later, it could possibly lead to a bad situation, and after that it could lead to a good thing. I know you will object and proclaim that an event can only defined as "luck" when the chain reaction of events ends and the final outcome of the first event is determined, but a chain reaction of events like that could never end since time never stops. Plus, even if a chain reaction of events could end. That doesn't mean the first event that started it all is "lucky".
It is a good message from Einstein that is also attributed to Feynman.
Kasparov seems to like Feynman's (somewhat self-contradictory) quote: "Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel Prize"
I prefer "only make something as complicated as it needs to be" or "make things as simple as possible, but not simpler"
Its crazy you just popped in, because I was thinking it applies to you most of all. And my friend, your whole profession relies on doing the complete opposite, your business is trying to confuse people and sound smart. hahahaha. oh man these kids were too entertaining. on that note i'm going to sleep.
Have a good night. Sweet dreams, cool out. over and out. lol
It is a good message from Einstein that is also attributed to Feynman.
Kasparov seems to like Feynman's (somewhat self-contradictory) quote: "Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel Prize"
I prefer "only make something as complicated as it needs to be" or "make things as simple as possible, but not simpler"
Its crazy you just popped in, because I was thinking it applies to you most of all. And my friend, your whole profession relies on doing the complete opposite, your business is trying to confuse people and sound smart. hahahaha. oh man these kids were too entertaining. on that note i'm going to sleep.
My business is in making things as simple as possible. Your lack of ability to understand the insights or process doesn't make them difficult, it just means you have a lower than average aptitude for maths/stats (which is perfectly okay!)
I recall you making a similar claim earlier about software development. I believe there you were struggling with the meaning of elegant, which at least in my field is the opposite of a brute force approach i.e. visual/quick/simple as possible because of some clever way of refocusing the problem
When you roll the dice, the result can be considered luck because humans can't predict it, as we don't have information about the angle, speed, weight and other stats needed to calculate a chaotic event of dice rolling.
A similar situation always happens when you make a chess move, because just as information needed to calculate a dice roll, we lack the information to make a chess move. We see enough to make a prediction, this is where the element of skill comes in. What we don't see are the move sequences past our skill of calculation, and how that affects the game out come. The information we lack whe making a chess move brings in the element of luck, just like in a dice roll.
It's not as black and white as if in a game skill is involved, luck cannot be.
Just like in boxing, most of the time you go by skill, taking information on your opponents position and movement and throwing your shot based on this info, this is skill. Sometimes in a fight you'll throw a random punch of desperation without reading your opponent. If this lands, you got lucky as most of the time you cant make a prediction without info, as we see with dice/lottery etc.
NO...we've never played...just observing behavior, that's all...
If your opponent blunders or misses a win, that is luck, in my understanding. Also, sometimes you have to choose between moves that look equally strong. John Nunn writes in Secrets of Practical Chess that he had been occasionally tempted to toss a coin at the board, because he was so unsure which candidate move was stronger. If you are in a similar situation, there is certainly an element of luck in your choice.
"If you have to attack the quote and not the point, it means that you do not understand the point." - zxasqw1212345
wow an 8 year old active account. You are legit.
Ziryab's is 15 years. More games and more posts.
I don't even recognize this guy's name.
Although, if we go by what chess.com staff value, some 12 year old spammer in off topic will probably win community member of the year, and I won't recognize their name either so...
It's like daycare in here, who let out all the kids?
You must be new here.
Welcome to the chess.com forums.
There is not free will , so luck or skill does not exist , just the facts
The study of the Gematria proves this , the merit does not exist in the universe , we call luck to the lucky winners but it is scripted they win no matter if they worked 10000 hours or 300 hours to improve their chess, they win anyway the day of the match .
Where can i play chess for money
On chess.com...
... but anyone who asks this wont be winning money... lol.
It's like daycare in here, who let out all the kids?
You must be new here.
Welcome to the chess.com forums.
Kids usually trickle in and out of the more serious discussion threads. But a group of kids all showed up at roughly the same time and a started spamming inane one liners. That could be coincidence...might not be. Someone may have made a call out for "reinforcements" in some club or something. I'm just pointing out the sudden arrival, not the existence of kids on chess.com that actually belong on chesskids.com, which is a longstanding issue 
.
Like I said, we are in agreement that there is luck in chess.
I said so because Akshath0 was able to explain easily and simply.
But you made too complicated points, and did not understand Albert Einstein's quote.