There is luck in chess?
Sort:
Feb 11, 2008
0
#22
Chess is too complicated to be played perfectly, so there is an element of luck, but good players make their own luck and have an instinct for what a good move might be in a position. Over time genuine 'luck' will even out.
fabricio78 wrote:
I think there is a misconception here on what "luck" means. A man would say he has been lucky because something that was not under his control has happened and favored him somehow. The key of this definition is "not under his control". In a card games, for example, the cards that are dealed to the players are distributed randomly, with no influence from any player at the table. So getting good or bad cards is completely defined by how lucky each player is. In chess, there is no luck at all because there is no factor that is not under the influence of the players. The move that a player executes is under his complete responsibility, as all the information about the game being played (position, material, etc) is available for both players all the time.
Of course you can say that you were lucky because your oponent made a mistake, but the reason for your victory was not luck; the reason is that your oponent made a mistake (so it's his fault). Conceptually, in chess there is no "luck" variable as there is in other games such as cards or dice.
I am losing on the board and my opponent has a choice of several good moves, all winning. For some reason he just "forgets" his clock and in trying to find the fastest win he flags and loses on time. Ofcourse his actions (or inaction in this case) is beyond my control and he has just lost on time in a game he was easily winning. This is pure luck that has favored me, good luck for me and bad for him. Nuff said
Feb 11, 2008
0
#24
Or if a player makes multiple sacrifices only to find out that there is a blunder in the calculations and the opponent has a move to escape? The opponent in haste and glee during the touch move game sees this, but attempts to castle by grabbing the rook first... 
Sunshiny wrote: Or if a player makes multiple sacrifices only to find out that there is a blunder in the calculations and the opponent has a move to escape? The opponent in haste and glee during the touch move game sees this, but attempts to castle by grabbing the rook first...
In tournaments you can touch the rook first and still castle.
I think yes. Some positions are "favourable" for the way that we play, and that positions can come by luck (decisions not expecting that result).
yes there is some 'luck' in chess, not as much as in other games but yes there still is...
my oppenent was lucky as he made a blunder so my pawn could take his knight, in the dialog box he said 'rough day for me'... i took the knight and he took my pawn... this however restricted my king movement and other pieces so lead to my demise (checkmate)... he was 'lucky'
There is no luck in a good chess game. If your moves leads up to opportunities some 20 moves later that you didn't see when you made them then congratulation, you're a good positional player. Not a lucky player.
Note that I said in good chess game. In a game where two people just take turn blundering it's basically all luck.
In all the tourn i have played in, and thats been a bunch 35 years of OTB chess if you touch the rook first when castling it is a rook move. Always touch the king first unless you want to get in a big argument with your opponent and the TD.
Skill is much more important than luck, but they both play a role. For example, suppose a player makes a simple tactical mistake every ten games or so... simple tactical mistakes are not uncommon at the class level. His rating should be an accurate reflection of his strength and consistency, but if you happen to be the opponent facing him when he makes that once-in-ten-games blunder, you were a bit lucky.
In the chess.com Gold Membership Knockout Tournament, I won the first round because my opponent did not show up. Was that skill? Perhaps I am really good at psyching out the competition because of my endgame articles. :)
Markle wrote:
In all the tourn i have played in, and thats been a bunch 35 years of OTB chess if you touch the rook first when castling it is a rook move. Always touch the king first unless you want to get in a big argument with your opponent and the TD.
I played my first tourney in 1973 and have played since that time and I have seen players touch the rook first when castling but NEVER seen anyone that wasnt allowed to castle after doing so IF castling was legal in that position. Yes....I have seen heated arguments and the TD called to intervene. What always has happened, when I have been present, is that the offending player is warned, or sometimes penalized on the clock (usually his opponent getting 2 or 3 min added to his time) but I have never seen one forced to move the rook in such a situation. Its a similar thing when people castle using both hands, technically this is against the rules of chess but often nothing is done about it when it happens.
You can assume you were lucky to face a weak oponent or because he/she never showed up - you can consider yourself a lucky person. But in the chess game, there is no luck. It consists on two players and a board. Everything that happens in a game is the direct responsibility of these two players. A player can win because of a blunder done by the oponent, but in the game that is not considered good or bad luck - it is a fault and that's why the oponent lost.
Whenever I lose a game because of my mistakes, I can't say that my winning oponent was lucky - he won because I played badly, simply because I'm a bad player. Same reasoning is valid for winning.
fabricio78 wrote:
You can assume you were lucky to face a weak oponent or because he/she never showed up - you can consider yourself a lucky person. But in the chess game, there is no luck. It consists on two players and a board. Everything that happens in a game is the direct responsibility of these two players. A player can win because of a blunder done by the oponent, but in the game that is not considered good or bad luck - it is a fault and that's why the oponent lost.
Whenever I lose a game because of my mistakes, I can't say that my winning oponent was lucky - he won because I played badly, simply because I'm a bad player. Same reasoning is valid for winning.
You failed to address my example where I am clearly lost but my opponent just "forgets" his clock and flags, thus losing the game on time. Was I not "lucky" ?
Luck can play a role: The only time I can think of was when I was playing a guy in the correspondence chess who was much better than I was, and one time, I was able to capture his queen. I looked at the board again and again, and thought, "Hey, can I really get his Queen!?!?" and ended up winning the game. Afterwards he messaged me that he was drunk and tired. God, I love the Irish.... 
(disclaimer: before anyone freaks out, I was kidding -- see the smiley face? Just settle down.)
Luck: A combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance to bring good or ill to a person. (dictionary.com)
I'd say that there is some luck in chess. If your opponent doesn't show up, or, as in Reb's case, forgets about the clock, that's a combination of circumstances that brings good to a person. :) Even with fabricio's definition, where it has to be outside of one's control, that would be luck. You can't force your opponent to take a lot of time to think, so that's outside of your control. It might be under your opponent's control, but not yours, and it can favor you.
That said, I on no account think chess is a game of luck. There is some luck involved, as with everything, but it is mostly skill and strategical thinking (if there's a difference between the two).
Anyways, good luck to everyone in your chess games! :D
Feb 11, 2008
0
#37
Reb wrote: Sunshiny wrote: Or if a player makes multiple sacrifices only to find out that there is a blunder in the calculations and the opponent has a move to escape? The opponent in haste and glee during the touch move game sees this, but attempts to castle by grabbing the rook first...
In tournaments you can touch the rook first and still castle.
That's why i said a touch move game and not a tournament 
there is, indeed, luck involved in chess. less luck than in some card games, and games of "chance," but some luck anyway. when anyone plays chess, depending on their strength, there is always a possibility that they will make an error, on any move. you could do a statistical analysis of this if you wanted to, but whatever the actual numbers are, I think everyone would agree that there is a certain probibility that either player might make an error of some magnatude on any move. so, you are "lucky" in chess when it happens that your opponent makes an error when playing against you, and that you are then able to recognize the error and take advantage of it. another example is when you are playing in a complex position, and totally miss a very sharp sub-variation that your oppenent has...I mean totally not see the whole line. but you are "lucky" enough that this line doesn't work out for him...it's not like you analyzed it and rejected it, you were just lucky.
another form of luck is when your oppenent, a much better player than you, happens to play into an opening that is one of your "pet" lines...and the fact that you know this particular line better than she does enables you to get a much better game.
we all have good games and bad games...you are "lucky" when one of your better games happens while your opponent has a bad game.
There's a bit of luck in everything. In chess, if you're trying to set up a certain trap or knight fork against a good player, and it works, you're lucky. All the luck in chess is whether or not you have correctly guessed what your opponents next move was or will be. The good players just put themselves in better position if their plan is thwarted.
If you're lucky your opponent didn't see a move, that's not luck, he didn't see the move - less skill. Luck is based on randomness. Chess is based on skill. This is absolutely no randomness in chess. Poker - yes. Blackjack - yes. Not luck, just randomness that favors you for a moment. Luck is used to label things people can't explain that benefits them. It's almost almost profit as a result of random events that line up for "you" - but that's not luck. Just my opinion, mind you. Please don't enter any scathing remarks against me...I'm having a hard day today. :-|
Luck doesn't exist in your decisions. So if you made decision and that whas good, good for you. Mayde your opponent was rolling some 175600 side dice for move and thats why he think you were lucky. Have good LUCK for your games all.