@ Sirian: but when you think about player skill as being better to justify why unequal chance of winning are still fairness, then you face the question of how to define what it means by "better skill"?

@ Sugarpop: let's say that you play a chess game. Then either black or white will have a sure win strategy, or both will have a sure draw strategy. In the first case, the chance of winning are not equal, and in the second case, the chance are 0. Yet it still tempt to said that chess is a fair game. It get worse with game like weiqi (a.k.a. Go!) where the rule try to make the game fair by adding point to the white player (move second), but this means that either black or white have a sure win strategy. Sure it both case people are yet to figure out such strategy, but the existence of such strategy is real. Or we can look at a FPS, and we see that given a symmetry map, each player will simply take the best weapon, choosing a hiding position that give the best expected outcome, aiming weapon ready at the angle with best expected outcome: if the player is of the same skill, then it all left to the chance of making failure, randomized calculation of bullet damage, etc.; if the player is at different skill, then obviously 1 player do not have an equal chance to win. The list can go on with many other game but I only talk about those because it encompass several type of game mechanics (simultanous vs non-simulatanous; real time vs turn based; draw allowed vs draw not allowed).