Skill vs Luck Question

"Deadmoney Walking" <tbonesays RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87f07ee8-2bd0-4a13-be72-89720a2eb637@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 27, 4:21 pm, Dutch <n... RemoveThis @email.com> wrote:
> Lute wrote:
> > What would you say is the ratio of skill to luck in poker?
> > In NLHE? In Omaha, 7-stud?
>
> > To put it in familiar terms, suppose you were taking a test in
> > school. Max score is 100. There are 25 questions worth one point
> > each. The remaining 75 points are pure luck, so that you score a
> > random number of points from zero to 75 by chance.
>
> > In that scenario, skill (knowledge) accounts for only 25 percent of
> > your score, luck counts for 75 percent.
>
> > If we translate this into your "score" (results, profits/loss) in
> > poker, then what percent would you say is decided by skill, and what
> > percent by luck?
>
> > Even if skill is only 25 percent, that allows a decisive advantage
> > over someone with low skills. For example, a player whose skill lets
> > him make correct decisions 15/25 of the time, has a powerful advantage
> > in the long run over a player whose skill gives him correct decisions
> > only 10/25 of the time.
>
> > Maybe this is not a good way to set the question up, so if you have a
> > better way, I'd like to hear it.
>
> > Skill clearly is a strong factor in poker outcomes, but how strong is
> > it compared to luck, in any given hand, session, or year?
>
> Luck is essentially irrelevant, every player will have the same
> amount of good or bad luck over time. A professional gambler
> does not even consider luck to be an issue.

I do

That's a ready-made excuse for losers..

> If you can find
> games where you are better than the average player then you will
> make money in those games.

Not if the rake is too high.

That has nothing to do with luck, if you think the game conditions are
unfair then don't play.
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

> Sweet christ, learn the difference between "affect" and "effect"
> please. Or at least know your parts of speech and what goes where.

There are five distinct words here. When "affect" is accented on the
final syllable (a-FECT), it is usually a verb meaning "have an
influence on": "The million-dollar donation from the industrialist did
not affect my vote against the Clean Air Act."

Occasionally a pretentious person is said to affect an artificial air
of sophistication. Speaking with a borrowed French accent or
ostentatiously wearing a large diamond ear stud might be an
affectation. In this sort of context, "affect" means "to make a
display of or deliberately cultivate."

Another unusual meaning is indicated when the word is accented on the
first syllable (AFF-ect), meaning "emotion." In this case the word is
used mostly by psychiatrists and social scientists-- people who
normally know how to spell it.

The real problem arises when people confuse the first spelling with
the second: "effect." This too can be two different words. The more
common one is a noun: "When I left the stove on, the effect was that
the house filled with smoke." When you affect a situation, you have an
effect on it.

The less common is a verb meaning "to create": "I'm trying to effect a
change in the way we purchase widgets." No wonder people are confused.
Note especially that the proper expression is not "take affect" but
"take effect"--become effective. Hey, nobody ever said English was
logical: just memorize it and get on with your life.

The stuff in your purse? Your personal effects.
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

> > Skill in one hand has little to no affect
>
> Wrong.

Wrong

> > Skill in one session has little to no affect
>
> Wrong.

Wrong

> > Skill in a year is more like it
> > Skill in a career in poker, well if you have a 'career' in poker that
> > lasts over years the answer to this is obvious
>
> Fell

John
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

On Feb 27, 12:55 pm, Lute <lutelat....DeleteThis@msn.com> wrote:
> What would you say is the ratio of skill to luck in poker?
> In NLHE?  In Omaha, 7-stud?
>
Obviously, this question cannot be answered. Just taking NLHE by
itself, the situation will dictate the amount skill that is relevent.
For example, it's heads up at the end of a tournament, each player has
20,000 chips and blinds are 5000/10000. This situation is almost
entirely luck if not 100%. Take the opposite situation like a NL cash
game, full table, where each player has $1000 and the blinds are 1/2.
This is a deep stack NL scenario where everyone has 500BBs. This is a
high skill situation.

Also, for what it's worth, I would consider Pot Limit Holdem to be the
most highly skilled game of the most common casino poker games we play
today.
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

John_Brian_K wrote:
>> Skill clearly is a strong factor in poker outcomes, but how strong is
>> it compared to luck, in any given hand, session, or year?
>
> Skill in one hand has little to no affect
Bullshit. Granted on many hands it has no effect but it can make a huge
difference in a big pot when skill allows you to make the correct play
when the wrong play costs you money.
> Skill in one session has little to no affect
Again, I call bullshit. What is true for both of these is that luck
_can_ override skill in the short term. Obviously you can get your money
in as a large favorite and someone can suck out on you. That doesn't
mean that real skill can't make significant short term differences. It's
the simply an effect of the central limit theorem (more or less) that
the more you play, the closer your average of your samples are likely to
be to the theoretical population average.
> Skill in a year is more like it
> Skill in a career in poker, well if you have a 'career' in poker that
> lasts over years the answer to this is obvious
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

On Feb 27 2008 1:03 PM, John_Brian_K wrote:

> Skill in one hand has little to no affect
> Skill in one session has little to no affect
> Skill in a year is more like it
> Skill in a career in poker, well if you have a 'career' in poker that
> lasts over years the answer to this is obvious

How about you work on the skill of being able to post to RGP without
looking like a total retard. Leave the important stuff, like thinking, to
those of us who can type without drooling on our keyboards.

---
Morphy
xaqmorphy.DeleteThis@donkeymanifesto.com
http://www.donkeymanifesto.com

________________________________________________________________________ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

> How about you work on the skill of being able to post to RGP without
> looking like a total retard.  Leave the important stuff, like thinking, to
> those of us who can type without drooling on our keyboards.
>
> ---
> Morphy
> xaqmor... DeleteThis @donkeymanifesto.comhttp://www.donkeymanifesto.com

I really could care less anymore what a bunch or morons that LOVE to
ridicule people on RGP think of me anymore so you can expect more
postts from me (intentionally misspelled that)

Congrats Morph you single handiddly pushed me to push my ignormance on
RGP even MORE!

I mispell affect to effect which is a common occurence and I am a
"drooling idiot" Go smash a guitar on the stage or something will ya.
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

On Feb 28, Signal <sig....RemoveThis@lineone.net> wrote:
> In fact, at any one time, almost 50% of
> players are slightly better or worse than any other.


What about the other 50%?


Mark
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

On Feb 27, Lute <lutelat....TakeThisOut@msn.com> wrote:
> Maybe this is not a good way to set the question up,
> so if you have a better way, I'd like to hear it.
>
> Skill clearly is a strong factor in poker outcomes,
> but how strong is it compared to luck, in any given hand,
> session, or year?

No general answer, you have to specify
a specific game, and table of players.

Then, for any one player, you compare
his expected win (or loss) rate ($/hand),
to his variance ($/hand), and that
ratio is it.


Mark
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

"Mark-T" <MarkTanner50.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d249192b-58ff-4b7b-94e9-e8a05e03676d@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 28, Signal <sig....RemoveThis@lineone.net> wrote:
>> In fact, at any one time, almost 50% of
>> players are slightly better or worse than any other.
>
>
> What about the other 50%?

3% Shark
46% Fishies
2% Plankton too dumb to count without
using their fingers!!!


Mark
--
www.myspace.com/diputsur


PS: My numbers might be slightly skewed...
I ran out of fingers!
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question 

"Signal" <signal.TakeThisOut@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:6mies31dmo5q8egmjdj3is3j1jsi2bvb6t@4ax.com...
> "Lord Turkey Cough" <spamdump.TakeThisOut@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>> What would you say is the ratio of skill to luck in poker?
>>> In NLHE? In Omaha, 7-stud?
>>>
>>> To put it in familiar terms, suppose you were taking a test in
>>> school. Max score is 100. There are 25 questions worth one point
>>> each. The remaining 75 points are pure luck, so that you score a
>>> random number of points from zero to 75 by chance.
>>>
>>> In that scenario, skill (knowledge) accounts for only 25 percent of
>>> your score, luck counts for 75 percent.
>>>
>>> If we translate this into your "score" (results, profits/loss) in
>>> poker, then what percent would you say is decided by skill, and what
>>> percent by luck?
>>>
>>> Even if skill is only 25 percent, that allows a decisive advantage
>>> over someone with low skills. For example, a player whose skill lets
>>> him make correct decisions 15/25 of the time, has a powerful advantage
>>> in the long run over a player whose skill gives him correct decisions
>>> only 10/25 of the time.
>>>
>>> Maybe this is not a good way to set the question up, so if you have a
>>> better way, I'd like to hear it.
>>>
>>> Skill clearly is a strong factor in poker outcomes, but how strong is
>>> it compared to luck, in any given hand, session, or year?
>>
>>It's all luck.
>>Some people think there is an element of skil but they are retard.
>>Unless you are playing with someone with the IQ of an amoeba
>>it is pure luck.
>>
>>Yes some people have made a career out of poker, but just a handful.
>>Hundreds of people have made a career out of playing the lottery.
>>Are they good players?
>>No.
>>Just frigging lucky ba*stards.
>>
>>And remember a lot of those people who 'make a career' out of playing
>>poker are actually laundering drug money. They loose over all,
>>buy their way to final tables, but overall they are big losers.
>>
>>Do they get their pictures in the poker press when they are losing
>>thousands
>>of pounds a day or more? Not on your Nelly, just the once in a life time
>>big
>>win.
>>
>>It's a mugs game, get out while you can.
>
> Horseshit!!
>
> Poker is 100% skill (excluding split pots). Just like football, for
> example, there are numberous variables involved. Velocity, muscle
> tension, air refraction index, two numbers between 1 and 13 associated
> with one of four colours.
>
> Just like Sklansky (whose book can pretty much be summed up with the
> phrase 'play correctly, but not always!') I derive pleasure when I
> lose a pot, because I realise it's a "negative gain"/hourly rate/
> expectation/optimal/theory rate. OK, maybe I blew my bankroll
> overcalling with a well disguised small pocket pair 30 times in a row
> and missed every bastard flop, but average that out over the next
> thirty years and who's the sucker now??
>
> There are 80 million American's playing poker regularly.. and you have
> effectively spat on all of them and called them all mugs, pissing
> their lives down the drain.

Your words not mine :O|


> In fact, at any one time, almost 50% of
> players are slightly better or worse than any other.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
 >> Stay informed about: Skill vs Luck Question