amack1028 wrote:
Why do some oppossing players insist on dismissing the winning player as lucky when they are beaten.
Cognitive dissonance.
Lucky ?
Sort:
amack1028 wrote:
Why do some oppossing players insist on dismissing the winning player as lucky when they are beaten. Really ? Lucky at chess ? If there is one game in the world where luck does not factor in it's chess. No game requires more thought and calculation designed to anitcipate and, perhaps, even inspire an opponents actions and re-actions. What.... did a knight fumlbe ? Did a bishop land just inside the line. Did I draw a fortuitous Queen ? Give me a break peopel ....enough with the lucky accussations !
Perhaps they mean that you are lucky that they missed a good move, or they mean that you're lucky that they didn't see your threat. Some may say that you are lucky because they're upset and 13 years of age, but I highly doubt that should bother anyone to the extent of creating an entire dicussion thread about it.
Why do some oppossing players insist on dismissing the winning player as lucky when they are beaten. Really ? Lucky at chess ? If there is one game in the world where luck does not factor in it's chess. No game requires more thought and calculation designed to anitcipate and, perhaps, even inspire an opponents actions and re-actions. What.... did a knight fumlbe ? Did a bishop land just inside the line. Did I draw a fortuitous Queen ? Give me a break peopel ....enough with the lucky accussations !