No luck at all . Assuming or guessing opponent's move but there are no dice behind this .
Whoever plays the best move is the winner
luck and chess
Sort:
Feb 2, 2024
0
#5
bobby_max wrote
When you blunder your Queen and your opponent misses it, that's luck.
Blunder on blunder
Not luck, skill.
bobby_max wrote
When you blunder your Queen and your opponent misses it, that's luck.
Blunder on blunder
Thats true
When you blunder your Queen and your opponent misses it, that's luck.
Blunder on blunder
Thats true
Feb 2, 2024
0
#8
Well if your opponent blunders or he doesn't see your blunder that's luck .
Also if your opponent happens to play that very opening line that you are not well prepared for, as we, as humans, have a certain amount of memory and cannot remember every single line in any opening, there 's an element of luck there too.
Moreover what about gambits which are not very solid, and depend on the fact that humans ,not computers, MIGHT play the seemingly rational move, which, in that case, happens to be a mistake? There is also the luck factor there.
But when machines play there is not luck in chess. When humans play though, especially at an amateur level, I think there's the luck factor there, which sometimes might be the difference between a win and a loss.
If you blunder, and they miss it, thats a blunder on them
Feb 2, 2024
0
#10
The person chosen you played with live games is pure luck. Or is it?
Feb 2, 2024
0
#11
Before any meaningful answer can be given, the term "luck" has to be clearly defined. There's a lot of talking at cross purposes when discussing luck in chess because people mean different things when they say "luck".
Feb 2, 2024
0
#12
It is okay. The ambiguity of definition boost creativity itself. But if the OP wants, he can define what luck is if he truly want to know things efficiently.
Feb 2, 2024
0
#13
No luck, because there is no probability involved, its a matter of playing the best move, if your oponent blunders, thats is no luck, its him making a bad decision or playing poorly, same as you, If there was luck involved you should be able to beat StockFish once in a while, because instead of calculating the best move he would choose some move randomly and do it.
You confuse luck with skill issue
For example, if you have a friend who is 500 points higher rated than you but only plays 15|10 time control, you call them for a 1 minute bullet challenge and win
Is that luck or skill issue?
The same person practice bullet time control, and then you play with them and lose,that isn't luck ,they increased their skill in faster time control
If your opponent sees all the possible moves and choose a move randomly then it's luck but winning by their poor choice of not noticing the blunder is tunnel vision ,skill issue they should improve board vision
The only way you can win by luck in online chess is win by abandonmened if your opponent gets a work to do and they go to do that ,in their winning position
Feb 2, 2024
0
#18
A_Pompeu έγραψε:
"No luck, because there is no probability involved, its a matter of playing the best move, if your oponent blunders, thats is no luck, its him making a bad decision or playing poorly, same as you, If there was luck involved you should be able to beat StockFish once in a while, because instead of calculating the best move he would choose some move randomly and do it. "
But as i state there s not luck in chess when it comes to machines, so no I would never win stockfish. However when it comes to humans, there s always the luck element. For a lot of different reasons, some of them are mentioned above, because the human factor is there.
And yes btw, if you have prepared a lot of openings and your , online or OTB amateur opponent, plays the very only thing you are not prepared for, yes it can be considered as luck, realistically speaking. When it comes to machines or GM level luck is not an element probably but at amateur level, it is there, it is not bad to admit it. Chess is not a game based on luck but we cannot say that luck is never there. Generally, when humans compete in anything, you can never exclude factors that have nothing to do with objective matters.
i am luck
Do you think luck is of any importance in the game of chess? On one hand the position of the pieces on the board is something objective on the other hand when the moves are made by humans the luck factor seems to always be there.
Therefore could someone assume that when it comes to machines playing there is no luck factor at all in chess but when it comes to humans, the luck factor is of some importance in the chess games?