Is Luck a skill? Or is that just a meme?

>-1000
>-1000
>-1000
>+2000
>Net -1000
Doesn't seem reliable.

Doing a quick google search, it tells me a color bet only has a 1 on 1 payout, meaning you'll make no money on a win, and only a 1/3rd bet has a 2 to 1 payout, which should still eventually work though.

Nah, you win double what you put in. Bet 5, win 10. Literal 1:1 would be completely pointless because you could only ever lose.

Fair enough.

Blackjack is a better game for progressive betting. And the odds on a color are 46.3%ish; you're not factoring 0 and 00, which are colorless.

Horrible graph in the sports section. Whoever made this is just biased towards basketball because it's probably their favorite. Most of the time it's just dunks, so how is that skill? How is baseball, which is oftentimes nicknamed "Luckswing" higher than football+hockey.

Murican football should have its own label: Brute Force.
>t. someone who played for a team that constantly got beat by teams 50 pounds heavier with twice the player count

What the fuck kind of casinos do you play at? 1:1 win means you get what you put in. If you bet 5 and win, you get 5, not 10. So you have 10 after everything is said and done, not 15.

That's the same thing, but said a different way.
This is the stupidest argument I hear about gambling. Some people talk as if you lose what you put in and then win twice that, but other people talk as if you win the same amount without losing anything. It's literally the same thing. Bet 5, walk away with 10.

user, you realize that you don't ever keep the bet you make, right?

You have $5
You bet $5 / You have $0
You win $10 / You have $10.

The key difference here is you're not understanding that there is a point where that bet is no longer legally yours, which is why people report winning $10 instead of winning $5, even though $5 is the net win.

No, you make money on a 1:1. Exactly as much as you put in, but betting 100 means you walk away with 200 if you win.
Progressive betting on a 1:1 has the same pattern no matter how far you take it. As long as you quit immediately after a win, you will walk away with more than you came in with.

Me again To further clarify the confusion here, the problem is that most people don't understand how odds work because it's only really used in statistics and gambling, the latter of which most people "understand" intuitively.

Most people don't know that both numbers in odds are all inclusive. So people look at 1:1 and think "Out of every 1 time I play, I should win 1 times". But in actuality, the odds mean "1 outcome should be X, and 1 outcome should be Y out of all games, rounded down to nearest fraction". People think that odds mean "1 in 1 chance", rather than "1 to 1".

Example: If a horse wins 1 race out of every 10, that would be 1 in 10 chance, however, the odds are actually written 9:1. The horse will win 1 race for every 9 races it loses.

So one of you is reading 1:1 as "1 in 1" meaning that the bet would be pointless, and is used to reading it as 1 in 2 instead. But that's technically incorrect.

>chess
>first move has a statistically higher chance of winning

Better not play black kiddo.

It's skillful and realistic!

Does anyone else enjoy investing in character luck mechanics in whatever system they play?

>divegrass
>more skill than baseball

really makes you think

What system we are talking about?
Usually it is a merit/advantage/perk.
Or class ability.
IRL luck is just a meme ofc.

Yeah, like 2%.

Luck IS a skill.
So many people I know misunderstand the nature of luck, it's not even funny. Luck doesn't mean that no matter how improbable the event, you can make it happen. Luck means that when an improbable event happens, no matter when or where, you will always be there.

Luck is not the matter of making the unlikely a certainty.
Luck is the matter of being in the right place at the right time to participate in the unlikely.

There's nothing to lead me to believe this is true.

But I'm gunna.

And if you want a simple example, consider the following:
A lucky person is incapable of making the roulette always land on zero.
But whenever the roulette lands on zero, a lucky person will always bet on it.

None of the sports there involve more skill than hockey, least of all chimpball.

So the difference between a lucky person and a dumb person is the lucky person wind on his first lottery ticket and comes out ahead while the dumb keep sinking money into it until any wining is negated.

Except 5 of that 10 is yours, so your net gain is only 5.

Yes, but at the same time that Lucky Person had to purchase a lotto ticket first before it was possible for him to win the jackpot. It's not just good things happening to you, it's putting yourself in situations where good things could happen

>it's putting yourself in situations where good things could happen
That's what dumb people do too.
Pouring a months wage into slot machines, replying to the Nigerian prince, investing in the pyramid-powered knife sharpening company.

The difference between lucky people and dumb people is that it actually works for the lucky people.

>the pyramid-powered knife sharpening company.
?

Don't you know?

Pyramids are magical and you can sharpen your razors if you put it under our patented plastic pyramid overnight.

Just think for only 299,99 you NEVER have to buy a razor ever again.

Ok now you GOTTA send me a link. Reminds me of the multilevel marketing scam company that sent me flyers in high school- sell knives! During a recession!

Just google pyramid power, there's infinite power generators, healing tents, exclusive double pyramids!

Sounds like it'd get annoying for the guy operating the table. Does he or the casino have to stand there and let you do that or can he ask you to leave and refuse to let you play any more?

>can he ask you to leave and refuse to let you play any more?
Depends where in the world you are, general rules is no (working) systems allowed, only dumb luck, bad system are of course ignored as it's just more money for them.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system)

It only works if you got an infinite amount of money.
In a real situation you win small a good number of times before facing a massive loss.

Luck is the absolute power.

chess involves very little skill, more like a guessing game of what your opponent is trying to do

>reading comprehension
-1000
-2000
-4000
+8000
net gain of 1000

How is hockey half luck?

Luck isn't. But the ability to stack the odds in your favor, to accurately weigh risk vs reward, and to deal with the consequences of bad luck definitely arr.

Acting is a skill.

Reading your opponent is a skill as well, though.

Rock Paper Scissors is a skill-based game if you're serious about it. Most people play it like it's luck-based, but it doesn't need to be.

>Reading your opponent is a skill as well
This seemed appropriate to post.

When is the next fucking book coming out

Ask Lynch himself, the guy is known to visit Veeky Forums occassionally.

Someone's going to get triggered by that basketball.

>slavehoops
>skill

Chess has some luck, it has no chance, but it does have a degree of luck.

For instance, the other day, I was playing against a massively stronger player, who threw the Albin-Countergambit (an opening) against me. I'm really booked up on the Albin, courtesy of my old coach, and I know it far better than other openings, which gave me an opening and ultimately the win. That's luck.

That's called experience you dumb fuck

Fun fact people are most likely to go scissors on the first turn.
Going rock first is most likely to not lose.

In my own personal experience if you tie the first round people usually repeat their choice or go scissors in the second.

I win a lot of Rock Paper Scissors just by using the order rock rock paper. Which actually comes up a lot more than you might think.

Man, you tried so fucking hard to disprove someone and failed so fucking gloriously. Thanks for the entertainment, hope you learned something but probably not because you come off as extremely fucking retarded.

Have a great day.

This is a kind of Luck. That player happened to use the opening he knew best. It's not luck in the traditional sense but it's luck. In the field of Game Theory it's sometimes called Von Neumann Luck.

>still trying this hard
>took the time to google some game theory before he came back

lmao sure thing, sport. our collective experiences and how they shape our habits is "luck"

>it's "what is luck" episode on Veeky Forums
Let me tell you what luck isn't.

LUCK ISN'T CHANCE. There, did that catch your attention? Good, now let's get back to the topic.
This guy () has the right idea, even if he is technically wrong - chance is something unlikely happening. when something unlikely happens AND its outcome is important.
So, for example, this guy () was lucky to get an opening he was experienced at despite the opponent being stronger, i.e., an unlikely combination of factors occured when an important opportunity presented itself.

Again, rolling a natural 20 fifty times in a row is pure chance (or skill, if you can manipulate dice, but let's not get off-track).
Rolling a single natural 20, but when it is determining the outcome of an attack against the final boss, i.e., when it actually matters, is luck.

Chance manipulation is not luck manipulation.
Chance manipulation is when you can consistently flip a coin and make it land on heads 80 times, like you're some sort of Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern knock-off.
ABSOLUTELY ANY SKILL IS MANIPULATING CHANCE.
To use the same analogy, your skill at chess manipulates your chance at winning the chess match.

Luck manipulation is when you consistently make your every result matter.
It's when you change everyone's lives around you (including yours) by merely existing and going through your daily motions, without intending to.

Thanks for dealing with my autism and reading to the end.

I think he's saying it was luck his opponent did that move first, not luck that he knew how to counter it.

>is luck a skill
Can you, through training and practice, improve your luck? Is it something you can learn? No. Therefore, imo, not a skill.

>icefight lower than ape hoop

It wasn't luck, it was a cumulation of that opponent's experiences and expectations. If the opponent rolled a d20 and, based on that roll, chose which strategy to use and it was the one he was prepared to face then ya, that would be luck. Such was (presumably) not the case.

Like said, luck isn't chance. Because his opponent chose that strategy based on something not random, it was chance that the poster was matched against someone who chose to play a strategy he was prepared for, not luck.

playing the stock market is only really luck based if you aren't wealthy. with a significant amount of wealth your ability to consistently make money becomes more and more likely because you can invest large amounts into things with slow but relatively stable yields. the downside of having your money tied up in the market is negated completely when you have enough money.

Generally, casinos only kick out people who make a ton of money repeatedly.
Making small amounts of money (Anything less than tens of thousands won't even make them blink) will be ignored.

As for annoying, most, if not all table operators will get random weirdos all the time, making weird consistent bets. Like the one guy who always puts max bet on the number 20 until he runs out of money, or the dumbass who puts money on both evens and odds or who puts $5 on every single number. As long as you aren't behaving obnoxiously, they've got worse people around.

>ouchmyleg higher up than handegg

Why did he mean by this

As a former dealer, this guy knows what he's talking about.

in the SPECIAL system, I see luck as good attitude/open-mindedness/extraversion/pluck

I would argue that in a game of chess you have to be lucky enough that your opponent isn't better than you. Assuming you've trained as hard as you can for five years, but your opponent has been doing it for longer than you've been alive, that's just bad luck.

>basketflop and flopball above baseball

It depends. Are you supernaturally talented at being at the right place at the right time to benefit from things outside your control, e.g. being the millionth customer?
If so, luck is a trait, not a skill.

Or are you talented at capitalizing on chance occurrences in your favour by being skilled at reading situations and probability, e.g. noticing that the odds of winning are higher than losing if you follow a certain betting pattern? If so, luck is a skill, not a trait.

-5
-10
-20
so -35
Bet 40
-75
Win 80
+5
You won five bucks, not 45. I'm shocked no one caught that.

ITT: simple observations are made, and people show a poor understanding of probabilities, and how gambling works.

That's not a function of skill., that's a function of statistics user.

Assume min bet of 5, max of 100 (for simplicity)
>-5
>-10
>-20
>-40
>-80
>-100
>-100
>+100
Net change: -255

If Luck is a skill, one ought to be able to train it, and become "luckier" at things. How would you go about doing this?

Not even. Defense and 3pt shooting. If the team doesnt have one superstar and two allstars they have no chance to win in the playoffs. Look at the warriors or cavs.

Why are all those different ball sports on there? They all require the same amount of luck.

This, shaking my head, to be honest, famiglia.

>Practice batting so much that your brain can literally hit a 5 inch ball going faster than your eyes can even process
>Throw said ball at 90mph into a 3ftx3ft window approximately 60 feet away
>Near-perfect hand-eye coordination, split-second decision making, trajectory imaging, etc. etc.

Playing baseball at the major leagues is, I'd wager, more skill than basketball, where all you need to do is be really tall and learn how to make 3 pointers, which I can do already at 5 feet 10 inches.

Basketball is whack, yo.

Slots don't pay out even with receipts. The best slots in the house (the high stakes slots) still only return .9
Luck isn't a skill, self deception and risk management are skills. "Lucky" people are skilled at one or the other of those things. I'll let you guessential which is more common.

Would luck be me beating you with no skill or coaching beyond knowing how the pieces move?

If all the xianxia/xuanhuan I've been reading is anything to go by, then luck and wealth can both be considered skills.

>all you need to do is be really tall and learn how to make 3 pointers
This is hilarious. I mean, baseball has a much higher mechanical skill floor, but your concept of the skills that go into basketball is ridiculous.

>most of this thread
Wow, guys... please, just please, don't ever go into a profession that requires a rigorous understanding of statistics. Or human cognition. Or the disciplined use of words.

I may not be much better, but let me try.

***

Luck is a value judgement that individuals can make concerning a given series of events from a given context based on a given personal definition of luck. Human cognitive biases can completely overshadow outcomes when it comes to perceiving luck, though less of this is required as actual outcomes come more and more in line with the "luck" narrative.

An understanding of whether something is "lucky" or not changes from person to person, and in many ways isn't as useful as a common understanding of an outcome and the reasons behind it.

In other words: outcomes arise from a mixture of preset conditions and ongoing personal input; luck is psychological spin before, during, and after the fact. There is overlap. You want to be effective with both in order to be a capable individual.

This method is called "being the House, and using wheels with one or more 0 spaces".

>investing
>not skill-based
I bet you think that warren buffet got rich on penny stocks.

Having a decent chance of not losing your shorts is skill-based. "Winning big" is based on bankroll, longevity, discipline over time, skill, and chance conditions. Lack of any one of these at any time can fuck you permanently.

*losing your shorts in the short-term

I kind of like the idea of luck as an actual force that manipulates time and space around you. The last trial in 2 was funny as shit once I realized what was happening.

I played American football once. It was boring as fuck.

I just took the ball and ran in a straight line toward the goal. After the first time, the other team stopped trying to stop me.

>I played a game once, against inferior opponents and without appreciating either the fundamental act or the intricacies possible at a higher level of play
Oh wow and it was boring? How could that be?

lolwut? It's putting yourself in situations where good things could happen, not putting yourself in situations where you're guaranteed to be fucked.

But user, chess is a solved game. It is pure luck who goes first. Ergo, it belongs at the other end of the chart next to roulette.

Coin flips are deterministic.

But it is pure skill to know exactly what to do to win every time.
It's all well and good to say that someone could win 100% of the time, but plop down an amateur and they won't be able to pull that off.

How does someone get better at luck in general? IMO if you can't, it can't be a skill.

>tfw my parents maxed out the luck stay at my character creation

Feels pretty good anons, my luck always kicks in when I REALLY need it