41 replies to this topic

[urterminated]

Its more skill based, but luck is heavily involved aswell. Even if you look at long term. You can run below ev for thousands of hands. Seen graph 400k+hands steady below ev.

In short term luck can determine most of the outcome. Well for example tonight i lost x2 K high flush vs A high flush, 4 stacks KK vs AA, 2 set over set, some random losses with 91.2-95.5% chance to win(2 outers on going AI on flop or turn)

But you cant control luck. So think less about it.

[Madzpr]

Skills>Luck, you can have a crappy hand yet you play the right moves you still win. Luck has a big hit on your game but still good players win money no matter how lucky they are.

[Teh_pwnerer]

Madzpr said:

Skills>Luck, you can have a crappy hand yet you play the right moves you still win. Luck has a big hit on your game but still good players win money no matter how lucky they are.

Yep. Good players are skilled, but they can also keep their cool, and I beleive it's what separates the bad from the good. Poker is cruel, and variance is crazy. It's all about knowing how big an edge you have and grinding with it. If you play when on tilt, your edge is gone.

[ardnut]

I was on holiday with my gf and we decided to play poker at a quiet little bar one night.  So I tried to teach her how to play before we went.  She got the basics but was pretty confused really.  We played 2 games against mostly experienced players.  I won one game and I'm only an average player.  She came second in one game and all she did was bet when she had an ace in her hand.  Regardless of what was in the middle and no one else noticed this on the whole table of 8 players apart from me.

So sometimes the game is just pure luck... especially if you don't know your opponents (I mostly play against friends once every couple of months).  If you play against friends mostly I think you will find that the better players will win a lot more.

[urterminated]

nstomper, on 15 December 2010 - 10:36 PM, said:

As Short term is more luck, long term is skill.  Another HUGE part is emotional control.  If you tilt often, you are going to kill your ev.

what is "short term" and what is "long term" in numbers? This doesnt apply to every player. I know ppl who have been below ev for 500k hands. What would u say to them? 500k is short term play more? xD

[Kelarm]

urterminated, on 03 March 2011 - 09:47 PM, said:

what is "short term" and what is "long term" in numbers? This doesnt apply to every player. I know ppl who have been below ev for 500k hands. What would u say to them? 500k is short term play more? xD

I'd say long-term is probably in the neighborhood of 75k-100k hands.

It is possible to run bad for longer than that, but the vast majority of swings will not be that long.  Say you're a winning player at 2bb/100 and you go on a downswing where you lose -6bb/100.  I'd expect the swing to turn around by the 100k hand mark at the latest (i.e. you start winning 2bb/100 again, or hopefully hit an off-setting upswing).

The EV line on databases is really not an accurate tool for measuring variance.  It doesn't actually calculate the EV of each play you make.  For example, say you've got 77 and the flop comes K72r and you're OOP against an aggrotard.  You check/call his PSB on the flop, turn comes a 6.  You check/call again.  River is an offsuit 2.  You shove and he calls and tables 22 for quads.  Giant cooler will not show up in your EV graph.

Or, there's some maniac at your table shoving preflop with 50% of his hands (this actually happens occasionally at microstakes).  You finally pick up QQ and call him, and he just happens to have KK this time.  -85 (or whatever) bb for your EV line, but you made the right play.

Edited by Kelarm, 04 March 2011 - 02:21 AM.

[urterminated]

Kelarm, on 04 March 2011 - 02:19 AM, said:

I'd say long-term is probably in the neighborhood of 75k-100k hands.

It is possible to run bad for longer than that, but the vast majority of swings will not be that long.  Say you're a winning player at 2bb/100 and you go on a downswing where you lose -6bb/100.  I'd expect the swing to turn around by the 100k hand mark at the latest (i.e. you start winning 2bb/100 again, or hopefully hit an off-setting upswing).

The EV line on databases is really not an accurate tool for measuring variance.  It doesn't actually calculate the EV of each play you make.  For example, say you've got 77 and the flop comes K72r and you're OOP against an aggrotard.  You check/call his PSB on the flop, turn comes a 6.  You check/call again.  River is an offsuit 2.  You shove and he calls and tables 22 for quads.  Giant cooler will not show up in your EV graph.

Or, there's some maniac at your table shoving preflop with 50% of his hands (this actually happens occasionally at microstakes).  You finally pick up QQ and call him, and he just happens to have KK this time.  -85 (or whatever) bb for your EV line, but you made the right play.

yeah EV doesnt show every "bad luck" or "cooler" spot. For example i just had a hand i open standard 3bb from btn with TT 2 ppl call me. Flop comes 832 rainbow. SB donks 2BB i raise. Turn comes T. He donks again. I raise him again. River comes 4. He shoves all in i call and he shows A5. yay pokerstars.

Anyway on topic my opinion base from my experience is that poker is more of a luck game when you have common sense what to do until higher limits where ppl actually think and its possible to make smart plays; bluffing on micros is waste of time usually, unless its semi bluff on board where you have decent FE.

[Rice]

Think about it this way - everyone has the same amount of luck over time.  Not everyone has the same amount of skill over time.

[urterminated]

Rice, on 05 March 2011 - 06:45 PM, said:

Think about it this way - everyone has the same amount of luck over time.  Not everyone has the same amount of skill over time.

thats bs, because when somebody says that "same ammount of luck overtime" everyone thinks that over time is +-100k hands, while that overtime has a chance to last for all of your life. And there is no skill in poker until nl400(6max)

[Rice]

I didn't say +-100k hands.  I said over time as a generic thing.  You are clearly not getting what I said.

What I MEAN is for every time you shove with KK and get called with AA, the reverse will happen an equal amount of times in your career.

Edited by Rice, 07 March 2011 - 12:51 AM.

[Trimak]

More skill based than luck, there are lots of times where you know what hand your opponent has just from experience. Sure there are bad outs here and there, but skill > luck any day. Players aren't pro at poker for no reason.

[BaklivaX]

Yes.

[Evoncux]

id rather get great hands than be able to calculate how likely my shit hand is to become great on the river,turn n flop.

Edited by Evoncux, 28 May 2011 - 09:08 PM.

[xKodizzlex]

No, Poker is a maths based information game. People only make money at it because there are many people playing who suck a maths, and inaccurately use information.

[stcolbert]

xKodizzlex, on 29 May 2011 - 02:32 AM, said:

No, Poker is a maths based information game. People only make money at it because there are many people playing who suck a maths, and inaccurately use information.

It's not pure math in the sense that a+b=c, it's probability which has a huge luck factor. I'd say poker, especially live poker, is a vary balanced game of both math, luck and the ability to read people. That's what makes it such a great game.

[Knaittiz]

90% luck

[Geonosis]

The two are not mutually exclusive. If you're not skilled you may extract very little value from a monster. Similarly a strong player may astutely realise he has the best (albeit weak) hand on a wet board and extract thin value.

Obviously, luck is a factor in poker, but a strong player can take advantage of running good far more readily than a fish.

[Ayrasaurus]

50percent skill 40percent experience 10percent luck
Bad beats don't always happen it's just remember them better.
Try play on a table with players of a higher level than you and you will get quite quickly its more of a skill/experience game than luck.

[P1LL]

Since there are winning players that are consistently winning, this means that the amount of skill involved in poker has to be greater than the amount of luck.

A stronger player will always beat a weaker player in the long-run.

[Djandawg]

Luck is actually very very important. Most of the time things even out on the long run but stuff like:

-500bb effective stack all ins
-Taking shots playing higher stakes

are very costly and rare occurences in one's carreer. Those simply don't even out due to the fact that they don't happen often enough for the numbers to reach the actual percentage.
The cards break even regardless of the stack sizes and stakes you play. You can lose a 10buyin pot AA vs JJ knowing you were ~4 to 1 favourite and were due to lose 1 every 5 times. The problem is, next 4 times you may very well win but those are likely to be against shorter stacks. Same applies to moving up to higher stakes. Say you destroy 200NL, you move up to 400NL, you run bad and end up moving down to 200NL or worse to recover, you play some hands, cards break even but you end up losing money just like the 10buyin example above.
In poker, you need play with better opponents to get better and better opponents usually play at higher stakes. So when you are taking shots, you need not to run bad and by that  I don't mean you need to deliver bad beats: not being on the receiving end of a cooler or not taking bad beats are equally important. So if you are unlucky during those periods, you'll get stuck at smaller limits.
This is the reason there are so many unknown but amazing players who play stuff like $25/50 ; $50/100NL but you don't see them on TV because they didn't run good while taking shots or during a $1m prize tourney.

Edited by Djandawg, 07 May 2012 - 03:51 PM.