@Jade-1 said in #6:
> If you lose, it objectively means you are not as spatially intelligent as your opponent. Those are the sad, brutal facts.
Sorry but that's not a fact. A single game is not an indication of your chess intelligence (let alone general spatial intelligence).
> Chess is a perfect information game. There's no chances.
Chess does effectively have some chance involved, when it's played between imperfect players. Unbeknownst to both players, the game can sometimes head in a direction that makes the position easier for one player than the other. From a mathematical perspective it's a perfect information game, but from a practical perspective there's luck involved too (although less than in many other games).
> If you lose, it objectively means you are not as spatially intelligent as your opponent. Those are the sad, brutal facts.
Sorry but that's not a fact. A single game is not an indication of your chess intelligence (let alone general spatial intelligence).
> Chess is a perfect information game. There's no chances.
Chess does effectively have some chance involved, when it's played between imperfect players. Unbeknownst to both players, the game can sometimes head in a direction that makes the position easier for one player than the other. From a mathematical perspective it's a perfect information game, but from a practical perspective there's luck involved too (although less than in many other games).