OK, so I was purposefully steering clear of this inane thread, but every now and then I find useful nuggets posted between flames.
6) for those who are on a winning streak (over the course of 10,000 hands or so), you are likely overestimating your skill level
7) for those who are on a losing streak (over the course of 10,000 hands or so), you are overestimating the effect of luck
This struck me as a bit of a pessimistic view to me (at first glance). After thinking about it a bit though, I'd tend to agree that typical human nature is apt to take credit for things that go well (the upswing) and blame the downswing on circumstances (variance).
However, I think this is probably apt to depend on the person a fair bit. Poker players in general tend to have a bit of an ego, so I'm not really disputing the first point, I think we all tend to have a bit too rosy view of the game when we're winning (although experience tends to dull this a bit since we've been through the ups and downs a bit more).
Serious players I think tend to sometimes get too critical of their play sometimes when things go badly. Instead of sticking to solid fundamentals of how they're typically playing they look to reinvent the wheel and make some ill advised bluffs, hero calls, suicide value bets, etc. that they otherwise might not make when running well. A form of tilt to be sure, but I'm not just talking spazzy "I'm losing" raises, I'm talking about FPS inspired plays due to shaken confidence in their game.
While I think review of potential leaks is sometimes necessary during downturns, I think the player also needs to keep in perspective that it's only the short term and things WILL (eventually) turn around (assuming the player is still playing solid poker). Level-headedness during the ups and downs is a virtue IMO.
Seriously, stop with the luck stuff. It's all math. If you choose to not play the percentages most players, you'll almost certainly be a long run loser, unless your reads are amazing or you have a SuperUserAccount.
For any person that says poker is a game of chance and not skill. Tell them this How much did you lose in the the last year playing poker. Guarenteed they answer alot because they obviously have no idea about how the game is played. These people are the ones you want to invite over to your house on a friday night to take them to the cleaners. Heck, I have no problem winning 10000 from a guy who says its a game of LUCK!
For any person that says poker is a game of chance and not skill. Tell them this How much did you lose in the the last year playing poker. Guarenteed they answer alot because they obviously have no idea about how the game is played. These people are the ones you want to invite over to your house on a friday night to take them to the cleaners. Heck, I have no problem winning 10000 from a guy who says its a game of LUCK!
He will tell you 0, hes been unable to win a freeroll.
That is one of many bad beats. Just you and the other guy to see the flop. The flop comes up diamonds which he happens to have. What are the chances of that? Then he goes on to make his flush. Talk about a suck out hand for this. Furthermore who calls a preflop raise with 5 9. But this is what you are up against. People that play all kinds of cards and they sucking out on you. If are not calling this luck than what is it?
If you are dumb enough to give him alot of chips, then it's called implied odds. (if you are giving him those odds..hrmmm)
If you are dumb enough to give me alot of chips, then it's called implied ods. (if you are giving him those ods..)
you can do all the math you want and narrow the field as best you can. Doing this is not a fool proof guard against a suck out / luck out player. Another dimension besides luck and math is strategy. Even if you have a big hand should you be putting your tournament life on the line against someone who has twice as many chips as you or is severely short stacked. For the sake of survival being to aggressive could work against you as maybe being to passive.
strategy=skill lol...
It dosent matter if they can still suckout on you.
If you go all in 10 times and you are 90% to win preflop (lets just say its possible if it isin't, just for this example) then yes maybe he will suckout once on you, maybe twice, but you will most likely win way more money because if you play enough poker you will be put in these situations many times.
Also, when you play a tournament you have to set a goal.
If your going for 1st place then you need to think well, I need to take risks and I need to win all these chips at one point or another, so you will most likely need to win some 60%(you) vs 40%(villain). It is of course luck in this situation, but being the guy with 60% will win you more tournaments in the long run.
If you are saying that skill is not a big factor, then you are saying that probabilities are not a big factor.
How about this, we roll a dice 100 times, everytime it lands on 1,2,3,4 you give me 10$ and if you roll a 5 or 6 I give you 10$.
Why does it matter that I have better ods, they don't exist right? You can still get "lucky" and roll a 5 or a 6 anytime.
Comments
Uh, yes. I just did. You hard of reading?
It's good, isn't it. Borderline genius, not quite full genius though. Definitely not mad genius.
This struck me as a bit of a pessimistic view to me (at first glance). After thinking about it a bit though, I'd tend to agree that typical human nature is apt to take credit for things that go well (the upswing) and blame the downswing on circumstances (variance).
However, I think this is probably apt to depend on the person a fair bit. Poker players in general tend to have a bit of an ego, so I'm not really disputing the first point, I think we all tend to have a bit too rosy view of the game when we're winning (although experience tends to dull this a bit since we've been through the ups and downs a bit more).
Serious players I think tend to sometimes get too critical of their play sometimes when things go badly. Instead of sticking to solid fundamentals of how they're typically playing they look to reinvent the wheel and make some ill advised bluffs, hero calls, suicide value bets, etc. that they otherwise might not make when running well. A form of tilt to be sure, but I'm not just talking spazzy "I'm losing" raises, I'm talking about FPS inspired plays due to shaken confidence in their game.
While I think review of potential leaks is sometimes necessary during downturns, I think the player also needs to keep in perspective that it's only the short term and things WILL (eventually) turn around (assuming the player is still playing solid poker). Level-headedness during the ups and downs is a virtue IMO.
He will tell you 0, hes been unable to win a freeroll.
He should put his actions where his mouth is and choose a freeroll, play the freeroll, and win it, if luck is not a factor.
He should stop embarassing himself by making stupid posts that defy math..
If you are dumb enough to give him alot of chips, then it's called implied odds. (if you are giving him those odds..hrmmm)
you can do all the math you want and narrow the field as best you can. Doing this is not a fool proof guard against a suck out / luck out player. Another dimension besides luck and math is strategy. Even if you have a big hand should you be putting your tournament life on the line against someone who has twice as many chips as you or is severely short stacked. For the sake of survival being to aggressive could work against you as maybe being to passive.
It dosent matter if they can still suckout on you.
If you go all in 10 times and you are 90% to win preflop (lets just say its possible if it isin't, just for this example) then yes maybe he will suckout once on you, maybe twice, but you will most likely win way more money because if you play enough poker you will be put in these situations many times.
Also, when you play a tournament you have to set a goal.
If your going for 1st place then you need to think well, I need to take risks and I need to win all these chips at one point or another, so you will most likely need to win some 60%(you) vs 40%(villain). It is of course luck in this situation, but being the guy with 60% will win you more tournaments in the long run.
If you are saying that skill is not a big factor, then you are saying that probabilities are not a big factor.
How about this, we roll a dice 100 times, everytime it lands on 1,2,3,4 you give me 10$ and if you roll a 5 or 6 I give you 10$.
Why does it matter that I have better ods, they don't exist right? You can still get "lucky" and roll a 5 or a 6 anytime.