Luck in Chess

[COMMENT NOT DELETED]

"A coin flip by your definition has no chance. All the information is in front of you to calculate which side it will land on, it's just you can't do it in that short amount of time."

How about calling the flip before the person actually flips it. Or maybe more precisely, if you only know the logical statement "A or B" is true, it is literally impossible to rationally infer whether "A" is true, "B" is true, or if both are true just from that information. Poker, I mean, is basically like that at a certain point -- you can say that there is a 1 in 7 chance of catching a straight on the river or something based on your cards, what cards will give you a straight, etc., but you can't be any more sure than that no matter how smart you are, besides looking at the actual deck of course.

Chess on the other hand would be like 54,000 premises, that from any position can be used to derive the result. In theory it can be done, but people won't have the skill to always use the information properly.

If there is probability there is luck. When you play someone of same level and skill it's often first serious mistake that decides the game. If your opponent is the first one to make it - you are lucky.

In theory it can be done?

In theory I can watch them shuffle the deck, memorize the card positions, and play perfectly.

Even if not right away, over the course of many hands, I can memorize the cards.

If this sounds ridiculous, please recall what you're claiming about a perfect chess game

Oh man! I'm not lucky then. I've spent an hour making you understand. Gawwwd!

Only an hour, sounds lucky to me

        I thought it was somewhat fortunate when an online opponent of mine missed what was effectively my fool's mate the other day. That's an example of luck, I suppose.

Uri65 hasn't understood yet.

Let's argue luck doesn't exist.

I don't know I might respond to you tomorrow or something leiph haha.

Ok, don't worry about it :)

Fun, but I don't know enough about that stuff. Chaos theory, determinism, quantum physics, and all that.

Even I don't know that stuff, but can have a reasonable argument.

It seems like determinism is true, and that there is no luck.

But last time this discussion happened some people pointed out ideas I wasn't aware of, and it seemed like it wasn't such a sure thing.

I played better than you because of luck

Consider the following example:

I program a computer to play chess, with random movement.

If this computer plays against a computer that is programed the same way, wouldn´t it be pure luck the result of the game?

My 4 year old son plays chess this way, almost ramdonmly. So we can say there is a lot of luck involved in his games against other 4 year olds that play the same way.

When we learn to play, we stop making all random movements, but sometimes he have to chose between 2 or 3 options and we evaluate those options to be equal (at least this happens to me). So sometimes I choose 1 option almost ramdonly, and here you can be lucky (if for example you choose the best option without knowing).

I´m not a grand master in chess, but given a position there is a chance that I make the best movement even without knowing what I´m doing. If I choose the best movement for the wrong reasons, isn´t that lucky?

If people can't work out that there is luck in chess, at otb blitz or slowplay, or any game for that matter, then they either don't have the mental faculties to work out where and how or they simply don't believe in luck or randomness. A person can be a good chess player and yet not so good at applying intellect to other problems. That's more or less all there is to be said.

If they don´t that´s their own problem, but still can get lucky.

If I have a  map and decide not to look at it at a crossroad, I can be lucky and make the right choice by flipping a coin.

If I have 2 candidate movements, and I dont have the skill to determine that one is a blunder and the other is a good movement, and I make my decision flipping a coin, I can be lucky an choose the good one.

So yes, you can be lucky at chess.

Luck takes many forms in chess. An opponent can play right down a line you studied last night. Who is going to be stupid enough to say that is not luck? Or you can have two candidate moves which look about as good as each other and your opponent would play well against one and badly against another. Your choice of opening, choice of variation etc can all be down to luck, unless you are one of these odd people who think all future states of the universe are determined by past states and that, therefore, randomness and "luck" don't exist. But that's an ideological position and ideology never argues well against pragmatic realism.