Is there such thing as "luck" in chess?

Yup but i’ll tell u what i really meant in depth:
My own definition of LUCK :

it definitely exists just like special opportunities in real life… it can be a brilliant opportunity or a deadly blunder and just like real life, and it happens to all… in chess, whether you are a grand master or newbie, there is always a luck element in every game but it depends: a newbie plays and hopes getting lucky chances (opponent’s blunders) and prays for it but for  skilled players they create their own luck by game phases but in the end, even in grand masters games, luck exists but it’s definition is just their opponent’s blunders and inaccurate moves and mistakes.

I read all the posts today.  As usual, you make up your own imaginary position and then attack it.  I didn't say two engines can get lucky but two humans can't.  Not even remotely close.

The only "robots" that play chess have articulated arms that move their own pieces.  Again, are we 5 years old?  Google "chess playing robot", then click "images".  Notice anything?  The notion that all machines, software, etc. are robots is a cartoonish generalization.

In software, you *can* call a web crawler a "robot", traditionally...but that's a little tongue in cheek.  Developers liked the notion of an actual robot traveling around the web collecting things and bringing them back. 

My point stands.  Engines could be considered "luckier" than humans playing together would be when they get assigned white against another engine.  The reason is obvious to anyone that actually follows TCEC or the like...

Nothing so dramatic, sorry.  I corrected a misused word, so I don't have to deal with other people also deciding to call engines "robots" down the road...

You added this edit, so I'll respond separately to it:

"So much for lucky dogs, then?  

Engines win with black against other comparably rated engines even more rarely than the best humans, so it stands to reason that getting assigned white for a game between engines is even luckier for engines than for humans."

That's the original post.  Note how there was no change to "luckier" later on as your mind seems to have decided.  This is par for the course...almost all of your "contradiction" accusations are you misstating what has taken place prior.  I'm far from the only person to point this out.

Well, at least you seem to realize you can't keep up .  That's something accurate, anyway.

...once again ignoring the obvious joke because you have nothing else.

mans spitting straight shakespeare rn

lol, you guys are never going to get anywhere arguing, just read this book if you want. It's probably right. Luck Theory.

I admit, my theory was probably wrong, but I just like arguing.

actually this is probably better and it's free on kindle; Luck

I don't think he's measuring luck, it's just about his philosophy and understanding of it.

Imagine how knowledgeable we'd all be if we spent our time learning rather than arguing on the internet.

Haha, even though we disagree from time to time, you do have a knack for saying the right thing, at the right time. 

That is something I will never read. But, from reading the synopsis it sounds like it was written by someone who has not gotten lucky in a long, long, time. 

Man, u dont even get it and arguing with u is definitely futile, i said “thats my own point of view” AND i believe in creating my own luck (with finding blunders or “unlucky moves”), not praying for a fairy magic thing to happen in a game and let me to win… u’ve gotta consider other definitions of “LUCK”. As i said, in CHESS, LUCK IS THE OPPORTUNITY (bad or good) HAPPENS BY PLAYING A BLUNDER WHICH CAN BE CAUSED BY DISTRACTIONS,TIREDNESS, LACK OF SKILLS… THE FAIRY MAGIC FORCE U ARE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE ANOTHER DEFINITION OF LUCK BUT I PREFER CONSIDERING LUCK AS LACK OF SKILL OR OTHER BAD VIBES WHICH IN THE END CAUSE A BLUNDER THAT IS BENEFICIAL FOR THE OPPONENT.
Good Luck buddy ✌🏼🙌🏼 

Well, he's put it in BLOCK CAPS folks. I think that means he automatically wins the debate. 

This is such a strange thread. Why do several people think they can make up their own definition of "luck", then declare whether there is luck or not in a chess game based on that definition. It's a completely spurious argument.

nah man, no body tries to win the argument... i just expressed my own opinion but with extra stress. The definition of luck is different for everyone, just like believing in spiritual forces, metaphysics... imo i believe luck ain't all about fairy magic... many hidden parameters and subconscious parameters are involved in process of a game...a bad vibe, rage, tiredness, losing strikes, lack of focus and skills, etc... are also key factors in making blunders which are lucky opportunities for opponents. Luck as a magical, spiritual fairy thing happens in occasions like a black out in the middle of an online rated game, server error... in my own point o view which im definitely NOT forcing it is that 99.9999% we create our own luck and the 0.0001% may be fairy magical spiritual thing happens by means of universe or god's plan.  

why are there so many comments on this

Quot so, but don't quot me on that.

Well my comment wasn't directed at you.

But no, I don't think it is for everyone to make up their own definition. If someone were learning English as a foreign language we wouldn't say "everyone makes up their own meaning of luck"; it's a common word, with a definition.

Nor do I think it's like believing in spiritual forces or metaphysics. In a completely deterministic universe we could still say someone was lucky for being born handsome or winning the lottery.  I know that you have said you don't think luck is some magical thing but I don't think it's even necessary to frame things that way. It's not a nebulous thing that we are trying to reform into being concrete.