I would like to blame luck if things aren't going my way, but I...I can't.
I usually blame the cat.
because the cat is black!?
YEs. I painted it black just so I could blame it for my bad luck.
I don't think flipping a coin illustrates that there is no chance in chess. There are different degrees of probability of specific outcomes in coin flipping, in cards, and any games. Since human players, and actually neither comouters yet (but probanly very close to 100% in case of computers) cannot look so many moves in advance that they can see any conceivable outcomes/endings from all given positions they have to play based on their expectations of probability of moves by the opponent. The tree of possible moves in chess is very wide and players have to estimate what likely paths the opponent will choose as their own moves gradually narrow down the tree. Up to a certain move the possibilities become wider and less certain but after the mid game the possibilities begin to narrow down. Exact path may still not be known but the outcome may be. But the outcome is still not certain because players do not make perfect moves and do not see in future perfectly.
To me it is fully consistent with mathematical definition of chance. This chance is present as probability but it is of course not entirely random. Chess is still an open information deterministic game. I don't think "chance" means necessarily "random". In fact Indont think physicists and mathematicians have yet agreed whether mathematical randomness occurs in nature. I tend to agree that in absolute everything is deterministic. But to the participants of the world who may perceive themselves as free agents the world event may appear totally random and unpredictably. But it is an illusion that stems from ultimate lack of information that participants always try to narrow down by observation and patterns. So I think chess is a primitive version of the real word with an unimaginably great difference in probability and predictability of the "system"s original state and final state.
It's all really dependant on where you draw the lines.
9 parallel, equally spaced.
Then 9 more, parallel, equally spaced, each crossing the original 9 and to form right angles.
9 parallel, equally spaced.
Then 9 more, parallel, equally spaced, each crossing the original 9 and to form right angles.
That reminds me of the old chess joke: Jow many squares on a chess board?
64 + the players.
There is an element of luck in chess due to the fact that there are possibilities that are beyond the horizon of both players, this is more evident in computer chess actually imo.
FFS, the rules of chess don't contain any element of luck. The rules of the game.
I can win a game because my opponent died of heart-attack, but that doesn't have anything really to do with chess....
No luck in the RULES of chess
That's the basic difference from "lucky games" - those games contain an element (or more) of luck in their own RULES (like rolling dice or dealing cards from a shuffled deck)
...why do i feel like i'm repeating myself?
Well there are many superstitious chess players with strange beliefs... Someone can start a new thread on those recorded superstitious players and their offbeat beliefs...
BTW... I believe It is bad luck to be superstitious.... :D
FFS, the rules of chess don't contain any element of luck. The rules of the game.
I can win a game because my opponent died of heart-attack, but that doesn't have anything really to do with chess....
No luck in the RULES of chess
That's the basic difference from "lucky games" - those games contain an element (or more) of luck in their own RULES (like rolling dice or dealing cards from a shuffled deck)
...why do i feel like i'm repeating myself?
...but luck is still built into the game through the horizon effect. If both players/engines are unable to see a possibility that is advantageous for one player then that player is "unlucky" imo. The only way to completely removes this element would be to solve the game. Of course this element of luck is minimal and will only have an effect between two players of similar strength - and usually between stronger players - it's most evident with engines I believe.
FFS, the rules of chess don't contain any element of luck. The rules of the game.
I can win a game because my opponent died of heart-attack, but that doesn't have anything really to do with chess....
No luck in the RULES of chess
That's the basic difference from "lucky games" - those games contain an element (or more) of luck in their own RULES (like rolling dice or dealing cards from a shuffled deck)
...why do i feel like i'm repeating myself?
...but luck is still built into the game through the horizon effect. If both players/engines are unable to see a possibility that is advantageous for one player then that player is "unlucky" imo. The only way to completely removes this element would be to solve the game. Of course this element of luck is minimal and will only have an effect between two players of similar strength - and usually between stronger players - it's most evident with engines I believe.
unable = un+able = not able = lack of ability =/= lack of luck = not lucky = un+lucky = unlucky
Here's a wall for you to bang your head against Eseles.
FFS, the rules of chess don't contain any element of luck. The rules of the game.
I can win a game because my opponent died of heart-attack, but that doesn't have anything really to do with chess....
No luck in the RULES of chess
That's the basic difference from "lucky games" - those games contain an element (or more) of luck in their own RULES (like rolling dice or dealing cards from a shuffled deck)
...why do i feel like i'm repeating myself?
...but luck is still built into the game through the horizon effect. If both players/engines are unable to see a possibility that is advantageous for one player then that player is "unlucky" imo. The only way to completely removes this element would be to solve the game. Of course this element of luck is minimal and will only have an effect between two players of similar strength - and usually between stronger players - it's most evident with engines I believe.
unable = un+able = not able = lack of ability =/= lack of luck = not lucky = un+lucky = unlucky
You're missing the point, the horizon effect is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid for all practical purposes. Unless it is possible to account for every possible continuation then there is an element of luck.
Here's a wall for you to bang your head against Eseles.
thanks! there's a reason why i'm wearing a helmet
[hey, is there any hidden image in this wall? looks kinda weird]
To expand on my point luck is only absent from chess in a theoretical sense - in a real game luck always has a role.
That is unless you want to get into philosophical determinism in which case I would argue that luck doesn't exist at all.
i gotta buy a new helmet...
Or a bigger one....
Or perhaps a better alternative:
it's beer.
FFS, the rules of chess don't contain any element of luck. The rules of the game.
I can win a game because my opponent died of heart-attack, but that doesn't have anything really to do with chess....
No luck in the RULES of chess
That's the basic difference from "lucky games" - those games contain an element (or more) of luck in their own RULES (like rolling dice or dealing cards from a shuffled deck)
...why do i feel like i'm repeating myself?
Here's another way of saying it. Chess is distinguished from games of luck by the fact that it is a game of perfect information - that is to say none of the information about the game is hidden from the players. However - this is only true in a theoretical sense since in reality most of the possible continuations are not visible to the players.
Yes of course in theory you can solve chess and compeltely remove the element of luck through perfect play, however this is not a practical reality. In real practical games luck has a (small) role to play like it or not.
Drawgood wrote:
MuhammadAreez10 wrote:
You are 47/48 and your daughter is only 6?
why are you surprised? In some countries of the world people get married late and there is nothing wrong with that. Some people have kids without marriage and marry later. I know in countries where women have careers more often people have kids late, in countries where husband/father is usually expected to earn most of the money families will have children early. Nothing surprising here.
Areez writes:- I know that. But an age difference of about 40 b/w the parent and child is unusual. Lee has clarified it already.
I would like to blame luck if things aren't going my way, but I...I can't.
I usually blame the cat.
because the cat is black!?