Peanuts Begins by Charles Schulz for December 18, 2020

methinks ’tis the former, Charlie Brown

there’s no skill involved in checkers; chess, on the other hand,

Here’s a clew, Chuck: Lucy grows up to be a poll inspector.

Good Grief!

“Do ya feel lucky, Lucy? Do ya?”

CB can never be too sure…but we are sure he’s the world’s most gullible kid!

He’s applying the same optimism that he applies to baseball…there’s always next year

They’ve played another thousand games in maybe two months.

Or neither of them can actually count that high.

Wait a minute. Didn’t she let him win one a week or so ago?

In game theory there are games of “perfect information” and those that are not. In “perfect information” games, there is nothing hidden or random about the game – chess, checkers, tic tac toe – all represent “perfect information” games. When analyzing these, between unequal opponents the outcome is not random – the better player wins. However, when two people of equal skill are playing – the outcomes over time actually can be modeled pretty accurately using random distribution approaches. Particularly with such games where there cannot be a draw.

Four thousand straight and you have to ask if it was skill or luck? What, have you actually played ten thousand games with you having won four thousand of the remain six thousand. Not straight, just trading off as to who won. And then Lucy got on a lucky streak and won the next four thousand straight.

Wouldn’t surprise me if Lucy cheats.

She could never win enough to prove ability.