While it's true that in backgammon, skill largely trumps luck, that's not true for, say, Ludo. Sure, you still have decisions (which piece do I move, do I start

While it's true that in backgammon, skill largely trumps luck, that's not true for, say, Ludo. Sure, you still have decisions (which piece do I move, do I start a new piece or not), but the ultimate decider of the game will be luck. You might possibly see some value in strategy if you reran the game hundreds of times, but at the individual level, the dice decide the outcome. Because the real issue here is not whether our lives are predictable or random (they are obviously both), but to what extent. Your analogy demonstrates a case where randomness can be controlled, mine a case where it can't. So which applies best to our actual lives? Another analogy from the world of board games: one annoying habit of bad board gamers that gets brought up often in forums and hobby discussion boards is the habit of ascribing good outcomes to skill, and bad outcomes to luck. In my experience, that's true in other aspects of our lives as well. It's very difficult to see the luck involved when you do something successfully, even though it's usually there.