Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Is Chess a Game of Luck?

<Comment deleted by user>

I think as long as some of us think we can actually calculate the whole legal tree, this topic might not be worn out.

I think as long as some of us think we can actually calculate the whole legal tree, this topic might not be worn out.

@Robaloooo said in #70:

Suppose you are walking down the street and you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk. Nobody would dispute that's a lucky find.

Except Benko, apparently. He would say that the $100 bill was only there because somebody dropped it while they were under time pressure and got distracted.

But we all know you got lucky.

Yup, seems like a matter of perspective :D

@Robaloooo said in #70: > Suppose you are walking down the street and you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk. Nobody would dispute that's a lucky find. > > Except Benko, apparently. He would say that the $100 bill was only there because somebody dropped it while they were under time pressure and got distracted. > > But we all know you got lucky. Yup, seems like a matter of perspective :D

This is a pretty bad article, there is no luck inherent to the game of chess. What you're talking about is luck that affects your opponent externally, which could be said of literally any competition. Environmental luck doesn't mean that there is any luck as a part of chess. We know there isn't, which is why it's a beautiful game.

This is a pretty bad article, there is no luck inherent to the game of chess. What you're talking about is luck that affects your opponent externally, which could be said of literally any competition. Environmental luck doesn't mean that there is any luck as a part of chess. We know there isn't, which is why it's a beautiful game.

Of course it is!

You just need to be luck to be born Magnus Carlsen!

Of course it is! You just need to be luck to be born Magnus Carlsen!

@Robaloooo said in #70:

Suppose you are walking down the street and you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk. Nobody would dispute that's a lucky find. Except Benko, apparently. He would say...

He would say nothing. That's undisputedly luck for everyone because 1) you don't follow the person expecting an opportunity in case he drops a bill, 2) you can do nothing to raise or lower the chances that someone drops a bill right when and where you are walking. It's a perfectly random event, nothing comparable to chess

@Ars0nistt said in #74:

This is a pretty bad article, there is no luck inherent to the game of chess. What you're talking about is luck that affects your opponent externally, which could be said of literally any competition. Environmental luck doesn't mean that there is any luck as a part of chess. We know there isn't, which is why it's a beautiful game.

Exactly, perfeclty put. Thank you, I was starting to think nobody really liked chess anymore for its most peculiar and inherent beauty.

@Robaloooo said in #70: > Suppose you are walking down the street and you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk. Nobody would dispute that's a lucky find. Except Benko, apparently. He would say... He would say nothing. That's undisputedly luck for everyone because 1) you don't follow the person expecting an opportunity in case he drops a bill, 2) you can do nothing to raise or lower the chances that someone drops a bill right when and where you are walking. It's a perfectly random event, nothing comparable to chess @Ars0nistt said in #74: > This is a pretty bad article, there is no luck inherent to the game of chess. What you're talking about is luck that affects your opponent externally, which could be said of literally any competition. Environmental luck doesn't mean that there is any luck as a part of chess. We know there isn't, which is why it's a beautiful game. Exactly, perfeclty put. Thank you, I was starting to think nobody really liked chess anymore for its most peculiar and inherent beauty.

@Ars0nistt said in #74:

without catching on fire. time to flex the superational human full tree knowledge assumption behind chess is a deterministic game in some game theory sense, where all outcomes from all strategies are known. Or someone surgically correct that last statement please. complete information set and half-move transition level "determinism" is not enough for our small brain to know all the games possible ending in all W D or L outcomes possible.

But you are right, there are 2 questions possible within one.

  1. Is chess with the extra competition layer of rating and tournaments containing luck (let's be reasonable and adapt the question in amplitude, "is a game of luck" is a figure of speech and can be declined in degrees).

  2. And is there randomness/luck/uncertainty in core game of chess (the mobility rules and the termination rules, no clock no other administrative gizmos, or preparation aleas, such as who is the opponent and "am i feeling lucky today?" kind of stuff.

I have been addressing many times question 2. And others as well. The question 1) has been mostly covered I concur. And your answer to 2), I do not. see above. me and others clearly proposing that our subjectivity about the mechanisms (in this case here our knowledge/ignorance of the causal factors, i guess this is what we mean by not being luck) is what make the subjective call of an event having been lucky. I would also dissect luck into random, and value, is the event from "randomness", and is that favorable or not, luck unfortunately compounds the subjectivity at both levels).

yes.. there is objective uncertainty to be had currently in chess (no human can see the whole tree for the foreseeable future).

@Ars0nistt said in #74: > without catching on fire. time to flex the superational human full tree knowledge assumption behind chess is a deterministic game in some game theory sense, where all outcomes from all strategies are known. Or someone surgically correct that last statement please. complete information set and half-move transition level "determinism" is not enough for our small brain to know all the games possible ending in all W D or L outcomes possible. But you are right, there are 2 questions possible within one. 1) Is chess with the extra competition layer of rating and tournaments containing luck (let's be reasonable and adapt the question in amplitude, "is a game of luck" is a figure of speech and can be declined in degrees). 2) And is there randomness/luck/uncertainty in core game of chess (the mobility rules and the termination rules, no clock no other administrative gizmos, or preparation aleas, such as who is the opponent and "am i feeling lucky today?" kind of stuff. I have been addressing many times question 2. And others as well. The question 1) has been mostly covered I concur. And your answer to 2), I do not. see above. me and others clearly proposing that our subjectivity about the mechanisms (in this case here our knowledge/ignorance of the causal factors, i guess this is what we mean by not being luck) is what make the subjective call of an event having been lucky. I would also dissect luck into random, and value, is the event from "randomness", and is that favorable or not, luck unfortunately compounds the subjectivity at both levels). yes.. there is objective uncertainty to be had currently in chess (no human can see the whole tree for the foreseeable future).

"...assuming they don’t give up chess for a less painful hobby like naked beekeeping."

No truer words have been spoken about the game of chess. Bravo, sir.

"...assuming they don’t give up chess for a less painful hobby like naked beekeeping." No truer words have been spoken about the game of chess. Bravo, sir.

@MarkIorio said in #76:

He would say nothing. That's undisputedly luck for everyone because 1) you don't follow the person expecting an opportunity in case he drops a bill, 2) you can do nothing to raise or lower the chances that someone drops a bill right when and where you are walking. It's a perfectly random event, nothing comparable to chess

If you are saying there is no randomness in chess, I agree with you. It's not like dice.

But luck and randomness are not the same thing.

Randomness is about the unpredictability of events. Luck is a way of describing events from a personal viewpoint.

Randomness is objective and has nothing to do with individuals or their needs. Luck is subjective. It pertains to whether we see events as favorable or unfavorable to us.

Chess is not random, but it does allow for luck.

@MarkIorio said in #76: > He would say nothing. That's undisputedly luck for everyone because 1) you don't follow the person expecting an opportunity in case he drops a bill, 2) you can do nothing to raise or lower the chances that someone drops a bill right when and where you are walking. It's a perfectly random event, nothing comparable to chess If you are saying there is no randomness in chess, I agree with you. It's not like dice. But luck and randomness are not the same thing. Randomness is about the unpredictability of events. Luck is a way of describing events from a personal viewpoint. Randomness is objective and has nothing to do with individuals or their needs. Luck is subjective. It pertains to whether we see events as favorable or unfavorable to us. Chess is not random, but it does allow for luck.

@Robaloooo said in #79:

Chess is not random, but it does allow for luck.
Ok, fine, whatever you say. Chess is not a battle of minds anymore, now it's officially a battle of luck, and the chess world champion is Gladstone Gander, Magnus Carlsen won't stand a chance.

@Robaloooo said in #79: > Chess is not random, but it does allow for luck. Ok, fine, whatever you say. Chess is not a battle of minds anymore, now it's officially a battle of luck, and the chess world champion is Gladstone Gander, Magnus Carlsen won't stand a chance.