@ayoendy said in #30:
> what are chess players even gambling? their elo?
In a very strict interpretation, e.g. playing in a tournament with monetary prizes (especially if the prizes are at least partially funded by player fees) could be seen as a form of gambling. I don't say that I agree with such interpretation but here we are talking about people who have very restrictive views on many activities perceived as perfectly normal by most of the world.
> what are chess players even gambling? their elo?
In a very strict interpretation, e.g. playing in a tournament with monetary prizes (especially if the prizes are at least partially funded by player fees) could be seen as a form of gambling. I don't say that I agree with such interpretation but here we are talking about people who have very restrictive views on many activities perceived as perfectly normal by most of the world.
Chess is a game where you're free to think and plan. When a simple game like this gets banned, it makes you think about how important it is to be able to learn and express yourself freely.
Thinking and being creative are good for everyone. When people can think for themselves, new ideas grow.
Young people have lots of new ideas, and the future belongs to them. It's important to look forward and build a better future with fresh thinking, not just repeating the past.
Thinking and being creative are good for everyone. When people can think for themselves, new ideas grow.
Young people have lots of new ideas, and the future belongs to them. It's important to look forward and build a better future with fresh thinking, not just repeating the past.
I confirm that thanks to chess, I became a millionaire owning ghost companies in tax havens.
@Cedur216 said in #31:
> Indeed!
Wrong!
I say that gambling is only luck.
Chess is skill.
Say what y'all have to say.
> Indeed!
Wrong!
I say that gambling is only luck.
Chess is skill.
Say what y'all have to say.
@MIHIR_KATTI said in #35:
>Chess is skill.
Chess is luck, and I can prove it.
If you're lucky, all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of every game.
So luck is very important in chess, indeed. You have to be alive to make a move, after all.
>Chess is skill.
Chess is luck, and I can prove it.
If you're lucky, all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of every game.
So luck is very important in chess, indeed. You have to be alive to make a move, after all.
@qpalzm123456 said in #36:
> Chess is luck, and I can prove it.
> If you're lucky, all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of every game.
> So luck is very important in chess, indeed. You have to be alive to make a move, after all.
what does "all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of the game" has got to do with the overall game rules? It should be a skill-based explanation
> Chess is luck, and I can prove it.
> If you're lucky, all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of every game.
> So luck is very important in chess, indeed. You have to be alive to make a move, after all.
what does "all your opponents will have a heart attack on move 5 of the game" has got to do with the overall game rules? It should be a skill-based explanation
Banning things because they could lead to gambling is a hopeless task. Anything and everything can used to gamble with. Humans are very inventive.
You can gamble about what color car passes next in traffic, or whether it will rain tomorrow or not.
Will they insist that all cars must be green? Then people will gamble what make of car passes next, so they'd need to make a law you can only own one make of car, but that won't be enough. You'd need to enforce exactly one car model, then people would gamble on whether the next car has a cracked windshield, or headlight. So you'd have to ban people from driving damaged cars. Then people would gamble on which direction the next car came from, so they'd have to make all streets one way. The Taliban way to solve this would be to ban car driving altogether, problem solved. But then people would gamble on whether a camel or a donkey was gonna pass next, and so on...
Truth is, life itself is full of gambles. Its in the nature of existence. Many random things happen, which you have no control over, and trying to control everything just leads to a different kind of neurotic society. Maybe it would be simpler to just stick to banning gambling for money instead of banning anything that might be used for gambling.
You can gamble about what color car passes next in traffic, or whether it will rain tomorrow or not.
Will they insist that all cars must be green? Then people will gamble what make of car passes next, so they'd need to make a law you can only own one make of car, but that won't be enough. You'd need to enforce exactly one car model, then people would gamble on whether the next car has a cracked windshield, or headlight. So you'd have to ban people from driving damaged cars. Then people would gamble on which direction the next car came from, so they'd have to make all streets one way. The Taliban way to solve this would be to ban car driving altogether, problem solved. But then people would gamble on whether a camel or a donkey was gonna pass next, and so on...
Truth is, life itself is full of gambles. Its in the nature of existence. Many random things happen, which you have no control over, and trying to control everything just leads to a different kind of neurotic society. Maybe it would be simpler to just stick to banning gambling for money instead of banning anything that might be used for gambling.