Chess involves no luck, because you both start with a set board and choose how to play from there. Of course, you may be lucky in the sense that your opponent couldn’t sleep well last night because the neighbour’s dog was barking. Or that he accidentally ate stale food and has a stomachache while playing. But other than that, it’s all about ability and concentration.

I think Bridge is also like that. Even though there is a certain amount of luck involved, it is basically a game of strategy. And for me even backgammon is not really luck. Unless your opponent is extremely lucky, clear and strategic thinking can help you win in 90% of situations, regardless of roll.

Depends on how you define “luck” (and “game”, but generally, yes, many games have no luck.

Chess, Checkers, and Go are three classic examples.

Hex http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex_(board_game)

Don’t overrate luck…

most people think poker is “the luck of the draw” but there are poker champions who know how to play and make a losing hand a winner.

Really expert bridge players also win a proportionally greater number of games, even with lousy cards, than mediocre ones or novices.

I agree with you about chess. It’s about as close as you’re going to come to a game of pure skill. But card/dice games always have an element of randomness or luck.

Wouldn’t you like to know?

Chess = the luck of having found a player of lesser skill ;)

Anywhere shuffling and dealing cards is involved, there’s an element of luck. Yes, the better player can be divined statistically, but the luck of the draw is a major factor.

Chess is the best example I can think of. If your opponent makes a good move, it’s not based on luck, but on planning and lateral thinking. I can’t answer better than @Jack79, though.

Anything involving shuffled cards, dice, shuffled tiles or any other randomizing element is partly based on luck; the skill involved is the skill of making the most with what luck hands you. As others have pointed out, skilled players can essentially override the luck component, but anything that has even a small element of luck cannot be said to be based purely on skill. As pointed out by others, chess and checkers are of this type, since the state of the board at the outset, and all subsequent states of the board are based solely on decisions made by the players. Connect Four and tic-tac-toe are other examples. If you can think of any other games in which all players are given the exact same playing pieces in the exact same arrangement at the outset, in which no dice or shuffled things are used to determine the movements of game pieces, I would say that game is based purely on skill.

If you go beyond the board game model to physical games, such as throwing, running, or shooting games, luck is a very small component. However, due to varying environmental factors, I would not say that such physical games are completely devoid of luck factors.