1. e4 e5....not random yet. 2. h4...unexpected, probably bad, doesn't help developing....but not random. The player of White had an idea...throw stuff at the black king. 2...h5 if anyone is spectating the game, by now it seems random lol Consider though that at what point does the position become random? It only changes one half move at a time :)
luck or skill?
Sort:
SaintGermain32105 wrote:
Some positions are more unpredictable than others, but anyone who says he's not prepared for what is coming is lying. There's no genuine randomness in chess.
Agreed!
Apr 20, 2016
0
#24
SaintGermain32105 wrote:
Some positions are more unpredictable than others, but anyone who says he's not prepared for what is coming is lying. There's no genuine randomness in chess.
Even the best players in the world are forced to make their best guesses at some point. If it were possible to see where each move is leading, no one would play because the game would be too simple.
The rules of chess don't introduce luck, but when people play it there is some luck.
“A good player is always lucky.” (Perhaps never said by Capablanca, but attributed to him. He said that luck favored him during the prize awards at Nottingham in 1936)
Apr 20, 2016
0
#26
Maybe nothing in the universe is random and everything is subject to cause and effect. I think that may be true but I would argue that luck is merely an unplanned for and unintended for positive outcome. Of course the pieces ended up in the right places by cause and effect but not necessarily by human intention? I think the fact that the other players actions are unknown at least to some degree supports this proposition.
Well at least I know I've been talking with Capablanca.
Right. The less we know the more we are in intoit.
Both chess and poker are a game of skill. Skill predominates in chess.
Skill predominates over the long run in poker. A poker player who is
"all in" with a pair of aces vs another player who has the other two aces will lose about 2 % of the time due to luck of the one hand. But still, if that player is skilled, he will know that he got unlucky on that one hand and will go on to be a winning player in the long run.
There's some luck in chess in terms of the win/loss result, or else a player rated 1205 would beat a 1200 rated player 100% of the time.
That said, in chess, the element of luck is less of a decisive factor in the game itself. In chess, if you lose, there's pretty much always a bad move or judgment that lead to that loss. Even if you can't find it, a stronger player or computer will always be able to identify the losing bad move. Which you can fix the next time around if you repeated the position.
In poker though, you can definitely lose outright despite perfect play, just by receiving a bad hand. So luck is def more of a factor in the outcomes of poker.
Chess "luck" is far more elusive and will not always give you a victory. The random piece that covers just the right square can usually be attributed to proper piece placement in the opening or trying to do something else and it just happens to work better this way but it does feel like luck at the time. Either way, both are my favorite and least favorite past times. Just leave one alone for a week or two and do the other.
Apr 20, 2016
0
#33
Oddly enough, the less luck you get in chess, the stronger you are. It means that you have seen more into the position.
I would contend that there is no luck involved at all in chess, as the game is purely deterministic. You may say that you got lucky when an opponent blunders, but it's not like they drew a bad card or a roll of the dice didn't go their way. What really happened is that your opponent made a bad decision and you were able to take advantage of it.
Apr 20, 2016
0
#35
The odds are 2.16% and yes skilled poker players who play thousands of hands will eventually prevail if they are playing weaker players. The question is how many thousands of hands does it take to realize the statistics? 5 thousand? A million? In chess though even grandmasters can count on occasional blunders by opponents there are fewer surprises. In the end I must agree that both chess and poker are games of skill. And luck. Bur chess in the short term requires more skill for successful outcomes.
Some positions are more unpredictable than others, but anyone who says he's not prepared for what is coming is lying. There's no genuine randomness in chess.