No Harri,this is not about you 😉
The other day,in the pub,we were debating the following.
Sometimes,when reading chess books or talking to chessplayers,you come across the phrase 'he was lucky to draw' or when you beat someone 'you were lucky'.I find this strange.To me there is no luck in chess.The absence of the factor luck is even one of the things I like best about chess.Let's take this hypothetical example,say I'm playing a much stronger opponent,a GM even,and I have a mating combination which he overlooks,but I don't,and I win.Is this luck?Sure,I'd feel lucky,and it's very unlikely to ever happen,but,imo,it's no luck.He probably underestimated me(and for good reason),got careless and lost concentration.Maybe even thought he could get away with anything.But that's no luck,that's all part of the game.In that game,at that point in time,under those circumstances,I played better and the win is fully deserved.Note that I'm not saying I'm the better player,only in this particular game I played better.
What it comes down to is this: he made a mistake,I capitalised on it.That's chess,pure and simple.Nothing to do with luck.
What do you think?
🙂
I disagree. You were lucky that he made a mistake. Although if you believe in fate that sort of eliminates luck (unless you are lucky that fate has been decided a certain way😕
I mean, 999 times out of 1000 he wouldn't make that mistake, it doesn't have to be because he underestimated you, it could be that he was preoccupied with paying his gas bill and he momentarily lost his train of thought, or millions of other reasons. So if the probability of him making that mistake in any given game is 0.001, you are lucky to be the one playing him at the time.
agree with mosquito's reply.
Would add that the odd thing about chess is that the luck is only one way...
I.e. the benefactor is the lucky one - the one making the mistake was either complacent or just plain stupid for a moment, never unlucky.
edit - meant to add - I cannot think of other sports/games where this applies... open to offers.
A.
Originally posted by rhbAny game which is turn based and does not involve a random element after the game has started I would think, such as perhaps draughts, othello, and although I've never played it I think Go!
agree with mosquito's reply.
edit - meant to add - I cannot think of other sports/games where this applies... open to offers.
A.
However, backgammon and other dice games wouldn't qualify because there is randomness after the game has started.
Originally posted by rhbI think that happens whenever an athelete makes a strategic or tactical error (as opposed to a "goof", like tripping during a wrestling match).
agree with mosquito's reply.
Would add that the odd thing about chess is that the luck is only one way...
I.e. the benefactor is the lucky one - the one making the mistake was either complacent or just plain stupid for a moment, never unlucky.
edit - meant to add - I cannot think of other sports/games where this applies... open to offers.
A.
I also think luck has something to do with victory in chess, but does not play a role in long-term success. For instance, choosing white instead of black carries with it a small but definite advantage, which is swamped out over hundereds of games of alternating colour.
Something else to consider is the complexity of chess. Every turn you can make about 20 moves (until the number of pieces get whittled down). So for an opening 5 moves (10 half-moves) long, there's something on the order of 20^10 possibilities. That's a lot of possibilities. Every time we try to think ahead a certain number of moves, we get the same problem. We can direct our mental search by checking for strategic or tactical improvements for our side, as well as trying to minimize any possible advantage for the other side, thereby cutting down the number of possibilities to consider. But how do we know we didn't miss some quirky little gem? We don't. As our intuition gets better, we'll miss fewer and fewer, but I'm sure we've all had that "huh?" feeling looking at some GM games. So there's some luck involved in having the best train of thought. But over hundreds of games, it will become apparent who is lookng in the right place and who is merely guessing.
Feeling lucky, punk?
🙄
Originally posted by mosquitorespectNo, that's not luck. If you've just beaten someone because he was worried about paying the gas bill, then your opponent just made a mistake. Luck had nothing to do with it.
I disagree. You were lucky that he made a mistake. Although if you believe in fate that sort of eliminates luck (unless you are lucky that fate has been decided a certain way😕
I mean, 999 times out of 1000 he wouldn't make that mistake, it doesn't have to be because he underestimated you, it could be that he was preoccupied with paying his ga ...[text shortened]... that mistake in any given game is 0.001, you are lucky to be the one playing him at the time.
BTW, if gas bills are going to come into it, don't play a Russian. They never pay *any* energy bills :-)
Originally posted by ivangriceWell I know he made a mistake and I know HE isn't unlucky for doing so, but surely the chances of him making that mistake mean it is lucky for the player who benefits from the mistake, because it happened to be made at that particular time and was very unlikely (assuming it is a mistake the beneficiary will always take advantage of)?
No, that's not luck. If you've just beaten someone because he was worried about paying the gas bill, then your opponent just made a mistake. Luck had nothing to do with it.
BTW, if gas bills are going to come into it, don't play a Russian. They never pay *any* energy bills :-)
Originally posted by mosquitorespectWell, no. If his moves were in some way determined by a random element (the bounce of the ball, the rub of the green etc.) then that is luck. If your opponent cannot maintain concentration then he is simply not playing well. He has made a mistake. There's no random element outside his control.
Well I know he made a mistake and I know HE isn't unlucky for doing so, but surely the chances of him making that mistake mean it is lucky for the player who benefits from the mistake, because it happened to be made at that particular time and was very unlikely (assuming it is a mistake the beneficiary will always take advantage of)?
If I play you whilst I am drunk, and lose, are you lucky to have won?
Originally posted by ivangriceI'd say you were stupid to play me when you were drunk... but on another level this depends on a number of things I guess:
If I play you whilst I am drunk, and lose, are you lucky to have won?
Do I always play you when you are drunk?
Do you normally win when we play?
Were you winning this game at some point?
Was I 'winning' this game throughout?
Was I drunk?
Did we fight? 😉 (only kidding on this one)
Probably more factors thatn just those... my earlier point though was around the thought that in game...:
Kasparov vs rhb (0-1)
... I would imagine good luck played the part in my win. This was not countered by bad luck on the part of Kasparov.
This state is unusual in many other games/sports - as mentioned in other posts.
