Poker: Skill or Luck? - Page 4

short term luck

long term skill

gg

On June 20 2007 19:25 Critterer wrote: short term luck long term skill gg

Don't tap teh aquariumz........

Jesus, as much as I suck at poker, I can admit that it's 80% skill. So to answer your question, it's predominantly skill.

On June 20 2007 20:47 eekmice wrote: Jesus, as much as I suck at poker, I can admit that it's 80% skill. So to answer your question, it's predominantly skill.

lol at 80%. The % chances depending on the sample size. 1 hand is like 95% luck, 100 million hands is 99.9% skill.

On June 20 2007 15:24 stryfedll wrote: [...] I've spent thousands of hours of my life playing poker and studying it [...] and in the end I came out probably negative $1000 to $0 [...]

1000hrs is 3hrs/day for a year.
I dont like to be cruel but this is like ... wow. You sir are a slow learner.

--- Nuked ---

Well, either way its settled. Poker is fun. There are many variations of style that a player will adapt to over his experiences playing. There is something about the feeling of excitement when you really do make the right call. When you catch your opponent bluffing, or when you know you have the better hand and push all your chips in. In those moments you may feel completely confident that you knew exactly what you were doing the entire time, and that the game is one of skill. Yet, there are other moments when the completely opposite happens. These experiences create a conflict, and the true question is if a poker player can actually learn from his mistakes in order to become a better poker player. Or does he just change his style? Neither increasing nor decreasing his overall ability to win, just adjusting one variable in his play that makes him better at defeating the present opponent, but by changing it another form of opponent becomes stronger against him.

So maybe two skills in poker would be the ability to identify and choose your opponents, which you would have to recognize your strengths and weakness. Maybe another would be the ability to rapidly adapt to your opponents style.

I don't know if this question could ever truly be settled, but I think it is settled that on this forum overwhelming people support the idea it is one of skill.

Shane

luck obv

If poker were all luck, sammy farha would never loose :D

On June 20 2007 20:55 bigbb33 wrote: Show nested quote + On June 20 2007 20:47 eekmice wrote: Jesus, as much as I suck at poker, I can admit that it's 80% skill. So to answer your question, it's predominantly skill. lol at 80%. The % chances depending on the sample size. 1 hand is like 95% luck, 100 million hands is 99.9% skill.

what the fuck u talking about, a single hand is like, 0.003% skill (assuming full ring vs decent players). its a total crap shoot, ull be folding most of the time.

aka normally(exception is complete trash ppl), when you play 100 hands, being a good player will have an impact on your win rate of around 3%, not much more.

if there was truly 5% skill in every hands we would have some sick win rates lol

On June 20 2007 21:46 stryfedll wrote: So maybe two skills in poker would be the ability to identify and choose your opponents, which you would have to recognize your strengths and weakness. Maybe another would be the ability to rapidly adapt to your opponents style.

You played hole year and you got to that just now? That is pretty obvious otherwise poker would not require skill just knowledge.

skluck.

On June 20 2007 17:45 Nazgul wrote: casper is it you

LOL i was thinking the same thing

two of my aunts are coming to visit in a few weeks, and boy am I looking forward to them asking me that question

there's nothing I enjoy more in life than explaining complicated things to complete and total morons

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
omg lol talentedtom made my day

On June 20 2007 15:02 TalentedTom wrote: most of us are independantly wealthy, I don't know about others but I deposit ~20k monthly from my life savings into pokerstars to keep my roll alive

didnt even bother reading the rest of the thread.

stryfedll...........................

Think about another game that you can somewhat compare to poker. Like backgammon. Both people roll the same two dice yet some players are clearly better than their opponents. Do you think thats because they got "hot hands in a dice game!!!" every match they play, or because they simply know the correct decisions to make given the situation they are put in given the roll of the dice? Now is there a huge difference between rolling dice and making a move in backgammon and getting dealt cards and making a move with what you're dealt?

Perhaps you don't understand one of the main concepts of poker: minimize your losses and maximize your winnings. The good players do just that to a higher degree than the bad players who seem to maximize their losses and minimize their winnings - those players usually lack an understanding of the game and take the easy route by blaming it on bad luck. Most likely they are putting themselves in -EV situations making -EV plays.

Maybe you need to start asking for advice on this forum, or another or whatever. A book isnt going to tell you what you did wrong or right, all they do is BRIEFLY go over the core concepts. Hopefully a hand will come up that someone will give you their two cents on how you played and flip the switch in your brain that you unconsciously refuse to turn on.

i love talentedtom

make it rain

And Im officially on the TalentedTom bandwagon after this thread btw.

nudity

On June 21 2007 02:20 pinbaLL wrote: nudity

LOLZ