There's a line usually pinned on the Roman philosopher Seneca: luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. People put it all over social media and like most things on social media, it gets repeated so often that it stops meaning anything.
So let me try to make it mean something again, with a math equation and a football match that happened recently at the latest FIFA World Cup 2026.
The equation nobody writes down
We talk about luck like it's a single mysterious force, either you have it or you don't. But it's not one thing. It's two things multiplied together:
Luck = Preparation × Opportunities
Look at what that multiplication does. If your preparation is zero, it doesn't matter how many opportunities show up, zero times anything is still zero. And if you're the most prepared person alive but you never put yourself in front of a single opportunity, same result. Zero.
The lucky people aren't the ones who got more luck handed to them. They're the ones who kept both numbers high. They got good and they kept showing up to the table where things happen.
Hold that thought. Let's go to Texas.
Japan, the Netherlands, and the 88th minute
On June 14th, 2026, Japan played the Netherlands in their World Cup group opener in Arlington, Texas. On paper it was a mismatch in the most literal, physical sense.
The Netherlands are tall. Van Dijk, Van de Ven, the whole spine of that team is built like a row of wardrobes. Japan are one of the shorter sides in world football, quick, technical, but not the people you'd bet on to win a header. If you were designing a contest specifically to humiliate the Japanese, you'd make it about jumping.
And for most of the night, the script ran exactly as the bodies predicted. The Dutch dominated the run of play, around 60% possession, more passes, more touches in the box, the better expected goals. Van Dijk, a defender, rose for a cross and headed the Netherlands ahead. Later Summerville restored their lead. The Oranje even won the aerial duels comfortably, around 74% of them. The taller, richer, more fancied team was doing exactly what everyone assumed it would.
Then the 89th minute happened. A ball was worked into the box, Koki Ogawa rose at the back of it, and the move ended with Daichi Kamada finishing past a flailing Dutch keeper. 2-2. A point stolen, against giants, right at the death.
(Credit: FIFA)
Now a fun stat that flips the whole story, and the reason this match is actually perfect for what we're about to talk about. You'd assume the dominant Dutch were the ones bombarding the box with crosses. They weren't. Japan attempted more crosses than the Netherlands, 23 to 21. The team that was second-best on possession, second-best on xG, and losing the aerial battle just kept whipping balls into the box anyway, over and over, especially once the subs came on. Most of those crosses went nowhere. And then, in the 89th minute, one of them finally found a head.
So both halves of the truth are true at once, which is what makes it a great story:
They raised their opportunities by crossing it 23 times, and their preparation cashed the one that landed. A team that kept firing balls in long after it looked hopeless, that had drilled what to do when one finally dropped, that hadn't mentally checked out at 2-1 down, that team converted the half-second the universe finally handed them. The volume created the chance; the preparation finished it.
That's the whole equation in one match. Luck = Preparation × Opportunities. Japan cranked both dials, more attempts and the readiness to punish one, and stole a point from a team that, on every other number, beat them.
"Life is a game of numbers" — the other half
Okay, but sometimes you don't have elite preparation yet. Sometimes you're just starting. What then?
Then you turn the other dial: opportunities. You take more shots.
Japan's 23 crosses are a tiny, 90-minute version of this. Stretch the same idea across years and you get the tech world, a graveyard-slash-trophy-room of people who simply refused to stop attempting:
- WD-40 — the spray in half the garages on earth, literally means "Water Displacement, 40th attempt." The first thirty-nine formulas failed. Somebody had the patience to label their failures honestly and keep going.
- James Dyson built 5,127 prototypes of his bagless vacuum before one worked. Five thousand one hundred and twenty-seven. Read that again. He was wrong 5,126 times in a row, which by any normal emotional standard is a reason to take up gardening instead.
- Angry Birds was Rovio's 52nd game. They spent years nearly going bankrupt making 51 things you have never heard of and never will. Game number 52 is the one your aunt has on her phone.
None of these are "luck" in the lottery sense. They're the equation again, just weighted the other way: when each individual attempt has a low chance of landing, you survive by taking more attempts. You buy more lottery tickets in a lottery where skill stacks the odds in your favour over time.
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. But here's the part the motivational poster leaves off: you also miss most of the shots you do take. That's fine. The whole point is to take enough of them, while getting good enough at them, that the misses become statistically survivable.
"A moving man will surely meet his luck"
This is the line doing laps around the internet right now, and it's basically our equation crushed down into seven words. A moving man will surely meet his luck. It's everywhere, football captions. It spreads because it's true in a very specific, almost boring way: luck travels along roads, and you have to be on the road to get hit by it.
Luck cannot find you in your room. It does not have your home address. It finds you in the meeting you showed up to, the project you actually shipped, the conference you flew to, the cold message you sent, the game you released even though it was your 52nd one. The moving man isn't lucky because the universe likes him. He's lucky because he keeps wandering into the places where luck is standing around looking for someone to bump into.
My favourite proof is Stewart Butterfield, a man so committed to moving that the universe basically had to pay him twice to make him stop.
- He set out to build an online game called Game Neverending. The game flopped. But the little photo-sharing tool his team had built inside it became Flickr, which Yahoo bought.
- Did he learn his lesson and sit still? Of course not. He went and built another game, Glitch. That one also flopped. But the internal chat tool his team had cobbled together just to talk to each other became Slack — which Salesforce later bought for around $27.7 billion.
Twice he aimed at a target and missed. Twice the act of moving building, shipping, keeping a team in motion, produced the thing that actually mattered, sitting quietly in the corner of his failure. Same energy with Instagram, which started life as a clunky check-in app called Burbn until the founders noticed the only feature anyone used was the photos.
None of these people knew which attempt would land. That's the entire point, you don't get to know. You just keep moving, so that when luck finally comes down the road, you are, in fact, on the road.
The tech hall of accidental fame
Honestly, once you pull this thread, you realise a frankly embarrassing chunk of Silicon Valley is just people who completely failed at their original plan and tripped face-first into a better one. The "visionary founder who knew exactly what they were building" is mostly a story told afterwards, on a podcast, by someone who got lucky and is too polite to admit it.
A quick tour of the graveyard-slash-billionaire-factory:
YouTube was a dating site. The founders registered the domain on Valentine's Day, slapped on the slogan "Tune In, Hook Up," and literally offered women $20 on Craigslist to upload dating videos. Number of videos uploaded: zero. Romance dead, they shrugged, said fine, upload literally anything, and accidentally built the second-biggest website on Earth. The first-ever video was a guy standing at a zoo talking about elephants. Swoon.
Twitter fell out of a podcasting startup. It was born inside Odeo, right as Apple casually rolled iTunes podcasts over the entire industry like a steamroller over a grape. Staring down certain death, the team ran a hackathon, and the dumb little "post what you're doing right now" side-project ate its own parent company. Odeo died so your uncle could argue with strangers about football at 2am.
PayPal was an app for beaming money between Palm Pilots. Yes, the device. Two people had to point their PDAs at each other like wizards casting a spell to send $5. Shockingly, the world did not want to do this. So they tried "what if email, but it's money," and a fintech giant fell out of the side of the failure.
Nintendo — the Mario people, sold playing cards for ~70 years. Before video games, they also tried running a taxi company and, this is genuinely real, a chain of love hotels. The path from hourly-rate rooms to The Legend of Zelda is not a straight line. Nobody's is.
And my personal favourite, pure cosmic comedy: Brian Acton. In 2009 he applied for a job at Twitter and got rejected. Then he applied at Facebook and got rejected there too. His reaction, posted publicly: got denied by Twitter HQ, that's ok, would've been a long commute. He then went and co-founded WhatsApp, which Facebook bought five years later for $19 billion. The company that wouldn't hire him paid nineteen billion dollars for the thing he built because they wouldn't hire him. The man got rejected directly into a yacht. If that isn't "a moving man meets his luck," nothing is.
The pattern under all the jokes is the exact same boring, beautiful equation. None of them knew which attempt would hit. They just kept building, kept shipping, kept pointing Palm Pilots at each other, until something, almost never the thing they were aiming at, finally connected.
The trap on both sides
Here's where I have to be the annoying friend, because this idea has a failure mode on each end.
Crank only preparation and never ship, and you become the person with the perfect, polished, fully-architected app that has zero users because you never put it in front of a single human. Infinite preparation × zero opportunities = zero. You studied for a test you never showed up to.
Crank only volume and skip the preparation, and you become the person who sends 500 lazy job applications, builds 50 half-finished side projects, and pitches the same unbaked idea to everyone, and concludes the world is just unfair when none of it lands. Infinite attempts × near-zero preparation ≈ still basically zero, just louder.
And one more, the sneakiest: don't mistake a survivor's story for a recipe. For every Dyson who attempted 5,127 times and won, there are people who attempted 5,127 times at the wrong thing and quietly went broke, they just don't get a keynote. The equation isn't "suffer long enough and you're owed a win." It's "you control two inputs, your skill and your number of swings, and you cannot control the roll of the dice in between." Stack the inputs. Respect the dice.
So what do you actually do tomorrow
You can't manufacture luck. But luck is the product of two numbers you fully control, so go raise both:
- Get genuinely good at one thing — that's your multiplier. Skill is what converts a half-chance into a goal in the 88th minute. Suffer through the reps now so that when the ball comes in, your head's already in the right place.
- Put yourself in front of more chances — ship the project, send the message, enter the competition, publish the article you've been sitting on. Every swing is another roll where your preparation gets to do something.
Do both, long enough, and one day something will land and somebody will call you lucky. Smile and let them. You'll know it wasn't luck that showed up, it was you, prepared, standing exactly where the ball was always going to drop.
The short team can out-jump the giants. But only the one that practised the jump.
Now go take your shot. Preferably your 52nd one.
Top comments (0)