Why poker is not a game of chance...
Next time someone tells you that poker is only a game of chance just like bingo, and there is no skill to the game, send them this clip:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tpv6_J-Zw7E
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tpv6_J-Zw7E
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnXqmwAKHvY
1 outer on the river: 97% vs. 3%
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Cag-noIBBd0
1 out on flop then runner runner to make a 2 outer on the river: 94% vs. 6%
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bYvPwBEwx94
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEtk_WENKZA
These figures I doubt are true, but I'm just using it to show my point: For a rookie, poker will break down to 10% skill and 90% luck. Whereas a pro can shrink the percentage relying on luck, due to careful observation of other players, the current situation of the hand being played, etc... to 80% skill and 20% luck.
Yet, Every player knows that you can make all the right plays and still get outdrawn. There's always going to be at least one fish out there who's willing to gamble on their ridonkulous draw.
This is quite incorrect...the skill/luck ratio doesn't exist...we can only think of results in terms of expected value and statistics. A skilled poker player makes decisions that result in a (much) higher expectation than a rookie (who is likely at a -EV). The "only" role that luck plays is determining how far away the actual outcome differs from expectation.
In a simplistic sense, consider the following model of a HU poker game. A good player and bad player play a 6 hour session. The good player's decisions are better than the bad player's decisions, which (arbitrarily) equate to a +$300 EV for the 6 hour session. This is the "skill" aspect of the game.
Now, to model the impact of luck, assume that "Lady Luck" rolls two dice (once for the entire session) and decides to "transfer" [(sum - 7) * $200] from the worse player to the better player (e.g. if 3 is rolled, the final result would be: bad player = +$500, good player = -$500).
It is critical to note that the average amount that "Lady Luck" gives to each person is $0, but can be very significant on any given session. Because of skill alone, the better player will win money in the long run...but, due to luck, the bad player may win money from the better player in any given session.
So, I would argue that poker always breaks down into 100% skill...it's just impossible to determine the relative skill of a player by simply looking at his or her results of any given session (or even a set of sessions).
---
The impact of luck on a poker player's bankroll can be measured by [current bankroll - (EV of all decisions)]. If the number is positive, the player is lucky (if it is very positive, the player is very lucky). If the number is negative, the player is unlucky.
The reason why skill prevails in the long run is because, according to some non-trivial math, it is possible to prove that as the number of hands played approaches infinity, one's current bankroll equals the EV of all decisions.
This thread starts off by showing how Mike was bluffed off the best hand. All that really shows is that mike was an idiot for not protecting his kings at the start. A lesson on bad poker. Alot of these so called pros are pros who have been lucky enough to win a big money tournament and they are milking this success for all its worth by being on TV. The world sees them and think they are that good when really they are on TV to only get more freebies from the poker sites or the TV show for their appearance. SEE IT FOR WHAT IT IS: ADVERTISING. An elaborate infermercial to entice you to play poker on a website or get off the computer and go down to the casino and buy in so you to can be like them.
If they want to convince me they are that good they should start creating some sort of tournament average. Something similar to a baseball players stats. If they did this then you would truly see if there is really such a thing as a pro or someone who is just obscessed with playing poker by playing as many tournaments as they can until they get lucky to place in the money.
So are you saying that the players that you see time after time at final tables are extremely lucky?
So the fact that most of these "so called pros" as you call them make their living playing cash games means nothing?
See http://www.iprdata.com/ipr/home.html
=> If you look at the World Poker Tour which I like, it is very rare you see a so called pro win the event. It is always some unknown. Why? because luck is a huge factor. The prerequisites to being a pro is sound knowledge of the game and money management. You say these pros make there money at cash games so why are they bothering with the tournaments and wearing those poker site shirts? These so called pros most likely are getting some form of kickback for doing so.
Who is to say these people are making a living playing cash games. For all you know they wash dishes or work as a bartender and keep buying into these tournaments. Be specific as to which pros are making the final tables. I watch alot of poker and I don't see these so called pros make the final table all that often. Sure the odd one makes the final table or in the money but I wouldn't exactly say its a common occurence. How many tournaments did they have to play before they were lucky enough to make the final table?
Smoke and mirrors
And I guess the "so called" professional baseball / hockey / football etc players are also getting 'kickbacks". It's called sponsorship.
Just because you don't know a player's name. Don't assume that they are not professional (or a good player).
There are many very good players out there that do not make a living playing due to many factors. While others make a living at it. There are a few that fall into this category on several forums that I belong to.
Just because an "unknown" wins a tourney (which does take some luck), that does not mean that the pros did not make money before the final table. With the size of some of the fields you are no where near a final table when the tourney starts paying.
http://www.iprdata.com/ipr/playerDetail/id-5.html
As the saying goes, you need to get yourself into a position to be lucky.
(You need skill to be able to get "lucky")
comparing poker players to professional atheletes is not a fair comparison. We know how professional atheletes come to be. As for so called poker pros you win one tournament now you are pro.
Best of LUCK to you. Meanwhile, I'll continue to make money playing using my skill.
roulettes a good game
Nay...I'm gonna search for a 4 leaf clover and go all-in blind to make money..haha.
You would
Long time no hear.
Never said it was all skill. Just that skill plays an much more important role in the game than luck.
I play alot of online poker to improve my game. However, I have seen enough bad beats to know its takes more than skill to win.
Luck is short term.
Skill is long term.
If I had a genie lamp and the genie asked me if I would rather be a skilled poker player or the luckiest player I would take the luckiest player hands down.
If you want to go on thinking your play is above the cards in play or to be dealt that's your perogative.
At the low limits (where I'm playing) a good chunk of the players have no concept of odds and they will put in their money when they should be folding. A perfect example of this is an opponent who flops a four flush. If I'm heads up with him (or her) I will push every time. Why? Because if they are stupid enough to put in 50% of the money when they only have a 35% chance of winning I will beg, borrow or steal if I have to in order to keep playing with them. It doesn't take a phD in math to figure out that if you put up 50% of the money and only have a 35% chance of winning, in the long run you will go broke. I don't care if they make their draw a hundred times in a row. Eventually, I will win 65% of the time. That is a mathematical certainty.
Of course, there are many other skills that come into play and that I'm still developing but many losing poker players would do much better if they learned that putting a bigger percentage of the money in the pot than they are mathematically expected to win in the long run is a losing proposition.
Sure, sometimes your opponent is going to hit his two outer on the river and beat you. Guess what, in the long run it's going to happen 4.3% of the time.
It's like flipping a coin. It's a 50/50 proposition. But if you flip a coin ten times, I will bet that it will rarely come up heads 5 times and tails 5. But if you flip that coin 10,000 times it will be pretty much right on the 50/50 mark. So your argument that either the cards come your way or not so poker is luck is bunk. Sure, in the short term the cards may fall your way or they may not but in the long run the cards will fall the way they are mathematically expected.
I love playing against players like you. In the short term (like tonight's session) they lay a beating on me chasing and making their long shot draws but I've won way more money from them so far because of it.
Your belief is that your hands will somehow materialize those percentages is bunk. Its like some dork who goes to a roulette wheel and sees black has come up 10 times so he bets on red but to his shock black comes up a few more times and he goes bust for thinking that way. I think for roulette someone was saying maybe out of 300000 spins everything will reach balance. I doubt anyone will be able to take advantage of that wheel for that many spins.
There are things you can do to tilt the "PROBABILITY" in your favor but that in no way guarantees you will win. Whatever floats your boat.
Then join us tonight on Poker Stars and see how far luck gets you :bs:
Who did you search 4?
Working very well. Thanks for asking.
They do... it's called WSOP bracelets.
Perhaps your further misunderstanding the application of luck and skill in poker. Consider this...
Anyone can win a hand / pot. Some idiot that draws to a 2 outer down to the guy who calls all in bets with 72o. The main area for the skill however would rest in not only forcing this poor player to make mistakes, but also in how costly the mistakes are.
A good player can milk their good hands, and keep the poor players paying them off. A poor player either will chase away a decent player or will miss money they could have won through more skillful play of the hand.
Mark
I searched for hobbes, nothing came up so I figured you got beaten out whatever tournament you were in. Hence my Question!!
You pay the ten thousand and if the cards fall your way and you play your A game I am sure you will get that bracelet to.