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

>>51859435
Luck is the gift granted to us by the pantheon of the Dice Gods, whom you must appease with superstitious rituals and general ridiculousness.

Anyone who says otherwise probably hates fun and uses Gamescience dice.

>Implying roulette is pure luck
There's a method to literally never lose at roulette as long as you have significantly more money than you bet.

>>51859435
isnt baseball supposed to be the hardest "normal" sport based off of success rates of batting?

>>51859435
>luckswing further down than handegg

>>51859566

That's why most casinos have a max bet on roulette unless you're in some serious high stakes shit

>>51859566

Slots also aren't luck, they're probability. If you sit at the same slot machine for the remainder of eternity, the payout would even out to its set rate.

>>51859814
You actually want to dance around near the minimum bet. Bet only on a color, double your bet every time you lose, reset to minimum when you win. As long as you quit after winning (~49% chance every spin), you will never lose money.
Just as an example, minimum bid $5
-5
-10
-20
+80
Total net gain of 45
Win every time, no matter how high or low it gets.

>>51859882
luck is just superstition about probability though so that's being pretty pedantic

>>51859914

Max bet anon, max bet.

>>51860066
>-1000
>-1000
>-1000
>+2000
>Net -1000
Doesn't seem reliable.

>>51859914
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.

>>51860703
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.

>>51860039

Fair enough.

>>51859914

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.

>>51859435
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.

>>51859435
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

>>51860834
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.

>>51862418
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.

>>51862418
Anon, 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.

>>51860703
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.

>>51862418
>>51862498
Me again >>51862472

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.

>>51859435

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

Better not play black kiddo.

>>51862567
It's skillful and realistic!

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

File: IMG_0683.jpg (42KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 300x450px

>divegrass
>more skill than baseball

really makes you think

>>51859435
What system we are talking about?
Usually it is a merit/advantage/perk.
Or class ability.
IRL luck is just a meme ofc.

>>51862567
Yeah, like 2%.

>>51859435
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.

>>51865007
There's nothing to lead me to believe this is true.

But I'm gunna.

>>51865007
>>51859435
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.

>>51859435
None of the sports there involve more skill than hockey, least of all chimpball.

>>51865007
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.

>>51862458
Except 5 of that 10 is yours, so your net gain is only 5.

>>51865074
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

>>51865131
>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.

>>51865155
The difference between lucky people and dumb people is that it actually works for the lucky people.

>>51865155
>the pyramid-powered knife sharpening company.
?

>>51865198
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.

>>51865237
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!

>>51865258
Just google pyramid power, there's infinite power generators, healing tents, exclusive double pyramids!

>>51859914
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?

>>51865352
>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.

>>51859914
https://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.

File: Komaeda.png (171KB, 650x560px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 650x560px

>>51859435
Luck is the absolute power.

>>51859435
chess involves very little skill, more like a guessing game of what your opponent is trying to do

>>51860081
>reading comprehension
-1000
-2000
-4000
+8000
net gain of 1000

>>51859435
How is hockey half luck?

>>51859435
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.

>>51864389
Acting is a skill.

>>51866302
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.

File: cheating is art.png (133KB, 1136x924px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1136x924px

>>51867156
>Reading your opponent is a skill as well
This seemed appropriate to post.

>>51867168
When is the next fucking book coming out

>>51867370
Ask Lynch himself, the guy is known to visit /tg/ occassionally.

>>51859435
Someone's going to get triggered by that basketball.

>>51859435
>slavehoops
>skill

>>51859435

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.

>>51867586

That's called experience you dumb fuck

>>51867156
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.

>>51867586
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.

>>51867651
>>51867674
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.

>>51867694
>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 /tg/
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 (>>51865007) 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 (>>51867586) 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.

>>51867752
I think he's saying it was luck his opponent did that move first, not luck that he knew how to counter it.

>>51859435
>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.

>>51859706
>icefight lower than ape hoop

>>51868214
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 >>51868007 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.

>>51865352
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.

>>51859435
>ouchmyleg higher up than handegg

Why did he mean by this

>>51869474
As a former dealer, this guy knows what he's talking about.

>>51859435
in the SPECIAL system, I see luck as good attitude/open-mindedness/extraversion/pluck

>>51859435
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.

File: 204-hank-hill-whatever.jpg (24KB, 208x210px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 208x210px

>>51859435
>basketflop and flopball above baseball

>>51859435

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.

>>51859914
-5
-10
-20
so -35
Bet 40
-75
Win 80
+5
You won five bucks, not 45. I'm shocked no one caught that.

>>51859435
ITT: simple observations are made, and people show a poor understanding of probabilities, and how gambling works.

>>51859566
That's not a function of skill., that's a function of statistics anon.

>>51866715
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?

>>51861195
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.

>>51859435
Why are all those different ball sports on there? They all require the same amount of luck.

>>51859589
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.

>>51859882
Slots don't pay out even with receipts. The best slots in the house (the high stakes slots) still only return .9
>>51865007
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.

>>51867586
Would luck be me beating you with no skill or coaching beyond knowing how the pieces move?

>>51859435
If all the xianxia/xuanhuan I've been reading is anything to go by, then luck and wealth can both be considered skills.

>>51877510
>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.

>>51859435
>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.

>>51859566
This method is called "being the House, and using wheels with one or more 0 spaces".

>>51859435
>investing
>not skill-based
I bet you think that warren buffet got rich on penny stocks.

>>51881552
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.

>>51881787
*losing your shorts in the short-term

>>51865782
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.

>>51861251
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.

>>51882045
>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?

>>51865155
lolwut? It's putting yourself in situations where good things could happen, not putting yourself in situations where you're guaranteed to be fucked.

>>51859435
But anon, 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.

>>51882422
Coin flips are deterministic.

>>51882422
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.

File: IMG_0336.png (454KB, 414x499px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 414x499px

>>51859435
>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

>>51885649
You could say that losses at a roulette table can be minimized through knowledge as well but that doesn't make roulette a game with any measurable amount of skill.

>>51859566
>There's a method to literally never lose at roulette as long as you have significantly more money than you bet.

What you are talking about is martingale system, it only works with infinite money or if the chance to win is more than 50% (and you have some amount of money).

Even if the chance to win is more than 50%, you will get money in a slow way.


The best way to win at luck games is to find the one with biggest expected return

File: killme.png (157KB, 481x394px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 481x394px

>>51859914

Casinos love people like you. Martingale wins tiny or loses everything.

YOu don't really even have to formally refute the statistical calculations here. Just ask yourself, if Martingale is a surefire way to give yourself a >100% return on investment, why haven't people used it to make themselves infinite money yet?

A guaranteed positive ROI at a casino is literally infinite money. Keep that in mind when you hear about casino tricks, and ask yourself why this guy is selling you a book instead of using his trick to make infinite free money.

>>51886331
Essentially, you want to find a game such that your expected return is greater than zero, e.g.
>Pay $7, roll 3d4, win the result
>average roll: 7.5
>average net win: +$0.50
If the casino's doing casino things right, that won't happen, because that's how you lose money.

>>51886834
Generally because it's tedious and casinos literally kick out anyone who makes too much money.
But keep it small and it can go on forever. $500 here and there is literally nothing to the casinos, but it's easily achieved with Martingale with a minimal risk.

>>51886836

The only real way to do this is to count cards in blackjack, but there's no way you're gonna pull that one off in Current Year.

The other way to technically do it is Jacks or Better video poker, which when played optimally can get you so close to neutral ROI you can break even with whatever membership benefits the casino offers.

But that's boring as shit and you're still breaking the golden rule: Go to a casino to have fun, not to make money.