| |
Main
Date: 30 Nov 2006 02:32:49
From: lawhonac@HiWAAY.net
Subject: Luck or Skill?
|
I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
like last night ...
Thirty or forty of us all started with 9,000 tournament chips (45 Big
Blinds) in a local bar tournament with the blinds doubling about every
20 minutes. (I guess this would be considered a "fast" tournament,
where the luck factor tends to weigh more heavily.) After 3-4 hands
where I limped in and then folded after the flop, I bluffed at a hand,
got caught, and managed to lose a thousand chips. Now I'm down to just
over 7,000 chips. A few hands later I got "lucky" when I managed to
get all-in [preflop] for 5,000 chips against a guy who declared that he
had "a good hand" - which turned out to be K-J unsuited. Of course,
I'm delighted as I have AK of hearts - which pairs up with a King on
the turn. My "delight" is short-lived though: a Jack comes on the
river and I'm down to 2,000 chips. (I think I was something like a 4-1
favorite to win that pot.)
I fold the next 4-5 hands while trying to maintain my composure. Under
the gun, my eyes fall upon the welcome sight of two black Kings.
Deciding that I want just one caller who doesn't have pocket rockets,
(and fearing that I'll be called by too many other players if I come in
for a "standard" 3-4x BB raise that represents half of my remaining
chips anyway), I go all-in for my remaining 2,000 chips. I get the one
caller I was hoping for. She turns over an A-3 offsuit and hits a 4
(for a wheel) on the river. (I think I was maybe 3-1 to win that
hand.) So just like that, (holding Big Slick and wired Kings), I'm out
in two hands.
There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
my hands. Maybe he's right, but what else can you do when you get all
your chips in with 3-1 and 4-1 odds in your favor - and run in to a
brick wall?
I read a poker book where the author was saying that truly bad beats
only happen to "good" players. Well, if that's the case, then last
night I was the best poker player in the world!
I apologize for ranting like this, but it's preferable to kicking my
dog ...
Alan C. Lawhon
Huntsville, Alabama
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 17:39:25
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
The most important skill is being lucky.
When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your way
towards becoming very skillfull.
I touched on it in my hold'em book but only a little, Brunson talked about it in
his Super System I but I don't think he had the writing skills to really make it
clear.
On Nov 30 2006 4:32 AM, lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> like last night ...
>
> Thirty or forty of us all started with 9,000 tournament chips (45 Big
> Blinds) in a local bar tournament with the blinds doubling about every
> 20 minutes. (I guess this would be considered a "fast" tournament,
> where the luck factor tends to weigh more heavily.) After 3-4 hands
> where I limped in and then folded after the flop, I bluffed at a hand,
> got caught, and managed to lose a thousand chips. Now I'm down to just
> over 7,000 chips. A few hands later I got "lucky" when I managed to
> get all-in [preflop] for 5,000 chips against a guy who declared that he
> had "a good hand" - which turned out to be K-J unsuited. Of course,
> I'm delighted as I have AK of hearts - which pairs up with a King on
> the turn. My "delight" is short-lived though: a Jack comes on the
> river and I'm down to 2,000 chips. (I think I was something like a 4-1
> favorite to win that pot.)
>
> I fold the next 4-5 hands while trying to maintain my composure. Under
> the gun, my eyes fall upon the welcome sight of two black Kings.
> Deciding that I want just one caller who doesn't have pocket rockets,
> (and fearing that I'll be called by too many other players if I come in
> for a "standard" 3-4x BB raise that represents half of my remaining
> chips anyway), I go all-in for my remaining 2,000 chips. I get the one
> caller I was hoping for. She turns over an A-3 offsuit and hits a 4
> (for a wheel) on the river. (I think I was maybe 3-1 to win that
> hand.) So just like that, (holding Big Slick and wired Kings), I'm out
> in two hands.
>
> There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> my hands. Maybe he's right, but what else can you do when you get all
> your chips in with 3-1 and 4-1 odds in your favor - and run in to a
> brick wall?
>
> I read a poker book where the author was saying that truly bad beats
> only happen to "good" players. Well, if that's the case, then last
> night I was the best poker player in the world!
>
> I apologize for ranting like this, but it's preferable to kicking my
> dog ...
>
> Alan C. Lawhon
> Huntsville, Alabama
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 19:12:27
From: Gary Philips
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
Gary Carson wrote:
> The most important skill is being lucky.
>
> When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your way
> towards becoming very skillfull.
>
> I touched on it in my hold'em book but only a little, Brunson talked about it in
> his Super System I but I don't think he had the writing skills to really make it
> clear.
Let me see if I understand your concept. Years ago the Yankees were
a very dominant team. I'm talking the 60's. A lot a envious people
said they were just lucky. But I heard, and I can't remember who, a
tv announcer explain that it wasn't that they were lucky but that
they put themselves in a POSITION to be lucky. That's where the
skill comes in. Something like that, Gary?
Gary (...) Philips
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Nov 20:01:01
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 1:12 PM, Gary Philips wrote:
> Gary Carson wrote:
> > The most important skill is being lucky.
> >
> > When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your
> > way
> > towards becoming very skillfull.
> >
> > I touched on it in my hold'em book but only a little, Brunson talked about
> > it in
> > his Super System I but I don't think he had the writing skills to really
> > make it
> > clear.
>
> Let me see if I understand your concept. Years ago the Yankees were
> a very dominant team. I'm talking the 60's. A lot a envious people
> said they were just lucky. But I heard, and I can't remember who, a
> tv announcer explain that it wasn't that they were lucky but that
> they put themselves in a POSITION to be lucky. That's where the
> skill comes in. Something like that, Gary?
Yes.
There a lot of ways to do it. The way Brunson harped on was using early
aggression with a lot of bluffing with outs.
The idea was that he could pick up a small pot about 40% of the time and the
other 60% of the time he'd play for a slightly bigger pot as a slight dog.
His overall EV at the time of his bet was positive, but the only hands people
saw were the ones he went to the river as a dog.
So, when he won it looked like he was lucky. The reality was that he wasn't
lucky at all, he was just skillfull but it was hard for an observer to realize
that.
After his book he had to adapt other ways to get lucky since his book was widely
read. But the readers seem to have never understood that luck is not something
different from skill at all.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 20:02:51
From: Mrs. LHE
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 12:39 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
>
> The most important skill is being lucky.
>
> When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your way
> towards becoming very skillfull.
That's interesting. I think that it is a matter of someone being lucky enough
to have his skill rewarded. I'm trying to figure out whether this is the same
thing.
- Mrs. E
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Nov 20:04:22
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 2:02 PM, Mrs. LHE wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 30 2006 12:39 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
>
> >
> > The most important skill is being lucky.
> >
> > When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your
> > way
> > towards becoming very skillfull.
>
> That's interesting. I think that it is a matter of someone being lucky enough
> to have his skill rewarded. I'm trying to figure out whether this is the same
> thing.
No.
Think about what the hell the term "skill" actually means.
>
> - Mrs. E
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 16:34:56
From: Mrs. LHE
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 3:04 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 30 2006 2:02 PM, Mrs. LHE wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Nov 30 2006 12:39 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The most important skill is being lucky.
> > >
> > > When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on your
> > > way
> > > towards becoming very skillfull.
> >
> > That's interesting. I think that it is a matter of someone being lucky
> > enough
> > to have his skill rewarded. I'm trying to figure out whether this is the
> > same
> > thing.
>
> No.
>
> Think about what the hell the term "skill" actually means.
> >
> > - Mrs. E
> Gary Carson
> http://www.garycarson.com
>
>
I've thought about this and read your other post about Doyle's making himself
appear lucky.
Being skillful is using one's experience and proficiency to create a positive
end result in a given task. Using skill, a poker player can create the illusion
of luck, but this is not the same as true luck.
In a heads up hold 'em game, for example, a player holding AA will win most of
the time when his opponent holds JJ. The times he won't win, of course, are the
times his opponent's hand improves and his does not. The skill of the player
holding AA will help him control how much he loses in these situations, but he's
still going to lose some amount of money as a result of his opponent's good
luck.
He can skillfully lose money all day if this same situation keeps presenting
itself.
- Mrs. E
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Dec 19:47:11
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Dec 1 2006 10:34 AM, Mrs. LHE wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 30 2006 3:04 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Nov 30 2006 2:02 PM, Mrs. LHE wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Nov 30 2006 12:39 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > The most important skill is being lucky.
> > > >
> > > > When you get to a point where you understand that then you're well on
> > > > your
> > > > way
> > > > towards becoming very skillfull.
> > >
> > > That's interesting. I think that it is a matter of someone being lucky
> > > enough
> > > to have his skill rewarded. I'm trying to figure out whether this is the
> > > same
> > > thing.
> >
> > No.
> >
> > Think about what the hell the term "skill" actually means.
> > >
> > > - Mrs. E
> > Gary Carson
> > http://www.garycarson.com
> >
> >
> I've thought about this and read your other post about Doyle's making himself
> appear lucky.
>
> Being skillful is using one's experience and proficiency to create a positive
> end result in a given task.
Is it?
> Using skill, a poker player can create the
> illusion
> of luck, but this is not the same as true luck.
skill is about deicion making. It's about the management of luck.
Luck is about outcomes.
I'm not going to define either one because I think the whole concept of
contrasting skill and luck is nonsense.
It's like saying life is 72% what kind of car you drive and 38% whether you
remember your mother's birthday.
>
> In a heads up hold 'em game, for example, a player holding AA will win most of
> the time when his opponent holds JJ. The times he won't win, of course, are
> the
> times his opponent's hand improves and his does not.
Poker skill isn't about winning specific hand matchups. It's about the kinds of
bets you make.
> The skill of the player
> holding AA will help him control how much he loses in these situations, but
> he's
> still going to lose some amount of money as a result of his opponent's good
> luck.
Controling loss is easy. Just fold a lot, you won't ever have a big loss.
If you want to win a lot of pots, just bet a lot. You'll win more often than
you will with skillfull play.
Skill is about picking your spots, it's not in contrast to outcomes but it's not
about outcomes.
Mathematically, X is a random variable and x is a particular realization of that
random variable. Skill is an operation defined on X. Luck is an operation
defined on x. x doesn't just depend on the random variable, it also depends on
the skill applied to X.
>
> He can skillfully lose money all day if this same situation keeps presenting
> itself.
Yes, it's possible to skillfully lose money for a long time.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 17:10:23
From: Mr_T
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On 30 Nov 2006 02:32:49 -0800, "lawhonac@HiWAAY.net" <lawhonac@HiWAAY.net >
wrote:
>I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
>with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
>luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
>pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
>same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
>the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
>that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
>like last night ...
You should have watched the Professional Poker Tour show lastnight, Nov
29th, on Travel channel. Suckout after suckout after suckout. James Woods
had former WSOP champ Dan Harringon out the door until Harrington sucked a 3
outer on him. Harrington just told Woods, "Now you see how I do it". :)
Most everyone took the suckouts well and with class but it was amazing to
see so many hands like that in such a short time.
They say skill wins out over time. The problem is no one knows what that
period of time is. For someone who always seems lucky there is bound to be
someone else who seems cursed. With luck you never know.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 18:15:14
From: CHarrison100
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 12:10 PM, Mr_T wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2006 02:32:49 -0800, "lawhonac@HiWAAY.net"
> wrote:
>
> >I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> >with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> >luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> >pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> >same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> >the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> >that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> >like last night ...
>
> You should have watched the Professional Poker Tour show lastnight, Nov
> 29th, on Travel channel. Suckout after suckout after suckout. James Woods
> had former WSOP champ Dan Harringon out the door until Harrington sucked a 3
> outer on him. Harrington just told Woods, "Now you see how I do it". :)
>
> Most everyone took the suckouts well and with class but it was amazing to
> see so many hands like that in such a short time.
>
> They say skill wins out over time. The problem is no one knows what that
> period of time is. For someone who always seems lucky there is bound to be
> someone else who seems cursed. With luck you never know.
Do you know the season and episode number? I would like to download it. The last
one we got here on my cable was the Season 2 final table.
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Nov 19:20:46
From: CHarrison100
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 1:15 PM, CHarrison100 wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 30 2006 12:10 PM, Mr_T wrote:
>
> > On 30 Nov 2006 02:32:49 -0800, "lawhonac@HiWAAY.net"
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> > >with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> > >luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> > >pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> > >same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> > >the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> > >that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> > >like last night ...
> >
> > You should have watched the Professional Poker Tour show lastnight, Nov
> > 29th, on Travel channel. Suckout after suckout after suckout. James Woods
> > had former WSOP champ Dan Harringon out the door until Harrington sucked a 3
> > outer on him. Harrington just told Woods, "Now you see how I do it". :)
> >
> > Most everyone took the suckouts well and with class but it was amazing to
> > see so many hands like that in such a short time.
> >
> > They say skill wins out over time. The problem is no one knows what that
> > period of time is. For someone who always seems lucky there is bound to be
> > someone else who seems cursed. With luck you never know.
>
> Do you know the season and episode number? I would like to download it. The
> last
> one we got here on my cable was the Season 2 final table.
>
Found it I was season 1 episode 22 that Mr_T was talking about.
The one I thought was season 2 was the final table of the commerce because they
kept saying Bigler was the only guy to make both final tables. My Bad. Was an
excellent show.
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 08:14:23
From:
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
Couple quick notes:
You see the same players making the final table in big tournaments
because you are watching edited TV, which presents a vastly distorted
picture of what poker is about.
I have no idea as to the quality of you play, but in my experience,
people who use phrases like "Big Slick" pretty much universally suck
(unless they are on TV).
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 09:13:36
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 9:14 AM, salmoneous wrote:
> Couple quick notes:
>
> You see the same players making the final table in big tournaments
> because you are watching edited TV, which presents a vastly distorted
> picture of what poker is about.
How does the editing process put the same players at the final table? Do
they edit different parts of the tournament together to give the
appearance that they are there?
> I have no idea as to the quality of you play, but in my experience,
> people who use phrases like "Big Slick" pretty much universally suck
> (unless they are on TV).
~ MysteriAce
"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"
----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 16:03:53
From: Teabagger
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
Poker is a mix of skill and luck as you are finding out. In the short term, bad
beats happen all the time. Getting all of your chips in with AK against KJ is
fine. I'd normally be hesitant to push in this early in the tournament with big
slick, but with the other guys hand, it was the right move. You caught a tough
beat as a favorite. Shit happens.
What you have to remember is that Poker mixes luck and skill. If you want a
purely skill game, play chess. The luck factor is what attracts the weaker
players, which are the ones you make your money from. By some estimates, 2/3 of
the players on the internet lose money. They will occasionally get lucky on you,
but this is what keeps them coming back. If the better player won every hand,
this would be like chess - where the better player always wins, and the fish
wouldn't pay.
You need to focus on making the correct decisions, not on the results. If you
make the correct play and lose, so be it. If you consistently make the right
plays, in the long run, the results will follow.
On Nov 30 2006 5:32 AM, lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> like last night ...
>
> Thirty or forty of us all started with 9,000 tournament chips (45 Big
> Blinds) in a local bar tournament with the blinds doubling about every
> 20 minutes. (I guess this would be considered a "fast" tournament,
> where the luck factor tends to weigh more heavily.) After 3-4 hands
> where I limped in and then folded after the flop, I bluffed at a hand,
> got caught, and managed to lose a thousand chips. Now I'm down to just
> over 7,000 chips. A few hands later I got "lucky" when I managed to
> get all-in [preflop] for 5,000 chips against a guy who declared that he
> had "a good hand" - which turned out to be K-J unsuited. Of course,
> I'm delighted as I have AK of hearts - which pairs up with a King on
> the turn. My "delight" is short-lived though: a Jack comes on the
> river and I'm down to 2,000 chips. (I think I was something like a 4-1
> favorite to win that pot.)
>
> I fold the next 4-5 hands while trying to maintain my composure. Under
> the gun, my eyes fall upon the welcome sight of two black Kings.
> Deciding that I want just one caller who doesn't have pocket rockets,
> (and fearing that I'll be called by too many other players if I come in
> for a "standard" 3-4x BB raise that represents half of my remaining
> chips anyway), I go all-in for my remaining 2,000 chips. I get the one
> caller I was hoping for. She turns over an A-3 offsuit and hits a 4
> (for a wheel) on the river. (I think I was maybe 3-1 to win that
> hand.) So just like that, (holding Big Slick and wired Kings), I'm out
> in two hands.
>
> There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> my hands. Maybe he's right, but what else can you do when you get all
> your chips in with 3-1 and 4-1 odds in your favor - and run in to a
> brick wall?
>
> I read a poker book where the author was saying that truly bad beats
> only happen to "good" players. Well, if that's the case, then last
> night I was the best poker player in the world!
>
> I apologize for ranting like this, but it's preferable to kicking my
> dog ...
>
> Alan C. Lawhon
> Huntsville, Alabama
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 04:23:52
From: lawhonac@HiWAAY.net
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
LOL !!! You hit that nail right on the head! A few night's ago I got
to the final table as one of the short stacks against this guy who
delights in telling me how I consistently "overplay" my hands. (Of
course, he's sitting behind a mountain of chips comfortably ensconced
as the chip leader.)
About the third or fourth hand in, the other short stack (sitting to my
immediate right) goes all-in for his remaining 4,000 chips. I'm
holding KQ of spades, so I call his all-in bet and raise for all of my
remaining 8,000 chips. It folds all the way around to Mr. Know-it-All
who promptly calls - with a pair of pocket fives. We turn our cards
over before the flop. The guy to my right has a pair of pocket nines.
You guessed it: This guy who accuses me of consistently "overplaying"
my hands hits one of his two-out fives on the flop!
Alan C. Lawhon
Huntsville, Alabama
Zidane Valor wrote:
> > There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> > my hands.
>
> I've noticed that the people that tell me this are the ones that usually
> call off their chips to me anyway on a bad draw or dead to two or three
> outs.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 02:50:21
From: Zidane Valor
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
> There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> my hands.
I've noticed that the people that tell me this are the ones that usually
call off their chips to me anyway on a bad draw or dead to two or three
outs.
_______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 11:57:43
From: Iceman
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> luck in poker.
It does, but only in the long-run. In the short-run, almost all
players' results are very highly variable, especially in tournaments or
in limit poker - unless someone is totally hopeless or (much more
rarely) is destroying his opposition.
> As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> like last night ...
>
> Thirty or forty of us all started with 9,000 tournament chips (45 Big
> Blinds) in a local bar tournament with the blinds doubling about every
> 20 minutes.
There's probably more skill in a blackjack tournament than in that.
> There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> my hands. Maybe he's right, but what else can you do when you get all
> your chips in with 3-1 and 4-1 odds in your favor - and run in to a
> brick wall?
Play tournaments with a reasonable structure, or play ring games. If
you play crapshoot bar tournaments, understand that the luck factor is
very high no matter how well you play.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 12:06:43
From: Iceman
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
Gary Carson wrote:
> On Nov 30 2006 1:57 PM, Iceman wrote:
>
> > lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> > > I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> > > with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> > > luck in poker.
> >
> > It does, but only in the long-run. In the short-run, almost all
> > players' results are very highly variable, especially in tournaments or
> > in limit poker - unless someone is totally hopeless or (much more
> > rarely) is destroying his opposition.
>
> Results are just also variable in the long run.
>
> Average results gets smaller variance in the long run, results gets larger
> variance in the long run.
Gary is one of the few people here who understands statistics. As your
sample size gets larger, your absolute fluctuations rise, but your
relative fluctuations fall, and your results converge on your "true"
equilibrium.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 20:02:45
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 1:57 PM, Iceman wrote:
> lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> > I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> > with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> > luck in poker.
>
> It does, but only in the long-run. In the short-run, almost all
> players' results are very highly variable, especially in tournaments or
> in limit poker - unless someone is totally hopeless or (much more
> rarely) is destroying his opposition.
Results are just also variable in the long run.
Average results gets smaller variance in the long run, results gets larger
variance in the long run.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 06:03:47
From: Dave the Clueless
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
You can research aircraft, pilots, airlines, maintenance crews and
flight records in order to make the most skillful selection of a safe
flight and still die when your plane unluckily sucks a goose into the
left engine on takeoff.
Skill does not increase your luck. Luck is the alignment of random
factors. Skill can make you better able to take advantage of good luck
or minimize the damage from bad luck, but skill can't bring you luck.
|
| |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 04:33:38
From:
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> luck in poker.
It is my belief that Texas Hold Em poker is probably 55% luck and 45%
skill. You can play an almost perfect game of poker, make all the
right decisions but lose. In contrast you can play terrible and make
bad calls, get lucky and win. That is why luck is THE most important
factor. A great player who is card dead most of a tournament will stay
in longer than a poor player in the same situation but sooner or later
they'll run into trouble or get blinded away.
This doesn't mean it's not a skillful game though. With knowledge of
odds and the ability to read people you can, to an extent, create your
own luck. Going all in with AK, early in a MTT, is a poor play IMO.
It's not a made hand and there is no need to push. You were unlucky to
lose the hand, but you still made a foolish move. This isn't being
critical, we all make them, but the difference between an OK poker
player and a good poker player is they make less mistakes. It's also
important not to concentrate on the suck outs that happen to you, but
the suck outs you deal to others. If you get sucked out on it happens.
But if you suck out then it means you made a bad play and got
lucky....so concentrate on the bad play and work on fixing it. This
said I made an awfully bad read and play yesterday that won me a mini
tournament at a friends house.
Three players left, I am SB. BB folds, I look down at my cards and see
Kd Jd. I decide to raise, and the BB (who has been defending his BB a
lot) calls. The flop comes out K Q 4. The Q is a diamond. I may my
first error right now. I try and get too clever and I check the flop
hoping the loose aggressive BB will bet. He also checks. The turn
brings the Ace of diamonds. Mistake two. I should bet here to find
out where I am but I have a feeling he holds an Ace and I check. He
bets. Now I have a quandry. I am confident I am losing at this point
but I have a lot of outs. Royal Flush draw, flush draw, straight draw
(albeit a gutshot) and if I hit a K or a J I am confident two pair will
win it. I am still not 100% convinced he has an Ace and figure he may
even have a Q. I shove all in. He insta calls with A9os. Neither are
diamonds. I river a ten to make my straight.
Terrible play by me that got VERY lucky. I played it badly because I
was slightly drunk, but even when drunk I can recognise how badly I
played the hand. So last night was my lucky night. I won both the
tourneys we played and I played poorly. Prior to that I hadn't won in
about twenty games (offline and on) despite playing a LOT better in
most of those games than I did last night.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 08:42:55
From: Russell Patterson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On 1 Dec 2006 04:33:38 -0800, kingbullets@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
>> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
>> luck in poker.
>
>It is my belief that Texas Hold Em poker is probably 55% luck and 45%
>skill. You can play an almost perfect game of poker, make all the
>right decisions but lose. In contrast you can play terrible and make
>bad calls, get lucky and win. That is why luck is THE most important
>factor. A great player who is card dead most of a tournament will stay
>in longer than a poor player in the same situation but sooner or later
>they'll run into trouble or get blinded away.
>
>This doesn't mean it's not a skillful game though. With knowledge of
>odds and the ability to read people you can, to an extent, create your
>own luck. Going all in with AK, early in a MTT, is a poor play IMO.
>It's not a made hand and there is no need to push. You were unlucky to
>lose the hand, but you still made a foolish move. This isn't being
>critical, we all make them, but the difference between an OK poker
>player and a good poker player is they make less mistakes. It's also
>important not to concentrate on the suck outs that happen to you, but
>the suck outs you deal to others. If you get sucked out on it happens.
> But if you suck out then it means you made a bad play and got
>lucky....so concentrate on the bad play and work on fixing it. This
>said I made an awfully bad read and play yesterday that won me a mini
>tournament at a friends house.
>
>Three players left, I am SB. BB folds, I look down at my cards and see
>Kd Jd. I decide to raise, and the BB (who has been defending his BB a
>lot) calls.
Now that is real luck, to be able to fold out of turn and still be in
the hand!
>The flop comes out K Q 4. The Q is a diamond. I may my
>first error right now. I try and get too clever and I check the flop
>hoping the loose aggressive BB will bet. He also checks. The turn
>brings the Ace of diamonds. Mistake two. I should bet here to find
>out where I am but I have a feeling he holds an Ace and I check. He
>bets. Now I have a quandry. I am confident I am losing at this point
>but I have a lot of outs. Royal Flush draw, flush draw, straight draw
>(albeit a gutshot) and if I hit a K or a J I am confident two pair will
>win it. I am still not 100% convinced he has an Ace and figure he may
>even have a Q. I shove all in. He insta calls with A9os. Neither are
>diamonds. I river a ten to make my straight.
>
>Terrible play by me that got VERY lucky. I played it badly because I
>was slightly drunk, but even when drunk I can recognise how badly I
>played the hand. So last night was my lucky night. I won both the
>tourneys we played and I played poorly. Prior to that I hadn't won in
>about twenty games (offline and on) despite playing a LOT better in
>most of those games than I did last night.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Dec 2006 05:17:43
From:
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
Gary Carson wrote:
> On Dec 1 2006 6:33 AM, kingbullets@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>
> > > I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> > > with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> > > luck in poker.
> >
> > It is my belief that Texas Hold Em poker is probably 55% luck and 45%
> > skill.
>
> So you think they are seperable, mutually exclusive and all that.
>
> Did you read that in the bible or something?
>
> > You can play an almost perfect game of poker, make all the
> > right decisions but lose.
>
> Well duh.
Why the attitude?
> Do you think that has anything to do with the beleif that luck and skill are
> mutually exclusive?
I personally think luck and skill are seperate issues. Not just in
poker, but also in life. What is luck? And what is skill? Skill is
ability and understanding. Luck is when external circumstances, that
you have no control over, influence the outcome of your decisions
either positively or negatively.
Playing the odds means you appreciate luck and you try to put yourself
into lucky situations and avoid unlucky situations. Is that in itself
a skill? Not in my opinion. It's common sense.
> So skill is related to odds? But luck is related to biblical prophecy?
Skill is not related to odds. You can't influence the cards you
receive or the way they will fall. What you can do is appreciate just
how lucky you have to be to win a hand and fold accordingly. That
isn't skill. That's just maths. The skill in poker is knowing how to
read people, the ability to sense weakness and strength in your
opponent. Playing the player is the real skill in poker, not playing
the cards. All IMO of course.
> Gary Carson
> http://www.garycarson.com
Wow. He has his own website. Should I bow down and pray? Take all you
say as gospel? Arrogant tosser.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Dec 12:48:47
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Dec 1 2006 6:33 AM, kingbullets@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> > I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> > with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> > luck in poker.
>
> It is my belief that Texas Hold Em poker is probably 55% luck and 45%
> skill.
So you think they are seperable, mutually exclusive and all that.
Did you read that in the bible or something?
> You can play an almost perfect game of poker, make all the
> right decisions but lose.
Well duh.
Do you think that has anything to do with the beleif that luck and skill are
mutually exclusive?
>
> This doesn't mean it's not a skillful game though. With knowledge of
> odds and the ability to read people you can, to an extent, create your
> own luck.
So skill is related to odds? But luck is related to biblical prophecy?
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 07 Dec 2006 01:59:58
From: jgm
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
<kingbullets@hotmail.co.uk > wrote in message
news:1164976418.288248.174690@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> Going all in with AK, early in a MTT, is a poor play IMO.
> It's not a made hand and there is no need to push. You were unlucky to
> lose the hand, but you still made a foolish move.
Given the stated situation, as I understand it with regards the depth of the
stacks, it was far from foolish.
|
| |
Date: 01 Dec 10:04:06
From: jd00123
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
On Nov 30 2006 4:32 AM, lawhonac@HiWAAY.net wrote:
> I keep wanting to believe that skill (or at least patience combined
> with discipline and a modicum of skill) will ultimately triumph over
> luck in poker. As I continue reading and studying poker, (slowly
> pulling back the layers of the onion), I can't help but notice how the
> same top pros consistently make final tables in big tournaments. When
> the same folks consistently achieve at that level, something tells me
> that it's not "luck" - it can't be just luck. And then I have a night
> like last night ...
>
> Thirty or forty of us all started with 9,000 tournament chips (45 Big
> Blinds) in a local bar tournament with the blinds doubling about every
> 20 minutes. (I guess this would be considered a "fast" tournament,
> where the luck factor tends to weigh more heavily.) After 3-4 hands
> where I limped in and then folded after the flop, I bluffed at a hand,
> got caught, and managed to lose a thousand chips. Now I'm down to just
> over 7,000 chips. A few hands later I got "lucky" when I managed to
> get all-in [preflop] for 5,000 chips against a guy who declared that he
> had "a good hand" - which turned out to be K-J unsuited. Of course,
> I'm delighted as I have AK of hearts - which pairs up with a King on
> the turn. My "delight" is short-lived though: a Jack comes on the
> river and I'm down to 2,000 chips. (I think I was something like a 4-1
> favorite to win that pot.)
>
> I fold the next 4-5 hands while trying to maintain my composure. Under
> the gun, my eyes fall upon the welcome sight of two black Kings.
> Deciding that I want just one caller who doesn't have pocket rockets,
> (and fearing that I'll be called by too many other players if I come in
> for a "standard" 3-4x BB raise that represents half of my remaining
> chips anyway), I go all-in for my remaining 2,000 chips. I get the one
> caller I was hoping for. She turns over an A-3 offsuit and hits a 4
> (for a wheel) on the river. (I think I was maybe 3-1 to win that
> hand.) So just like that, (holding Big Slick and wired Kings), I'm out
> in two hands.
>
> There's a guy I play with who tells me that I consistently "overplay"
> my hands. Maybe he's right, but what else can you do when you get all
> your chips in with 3-1 and 4-1 odds in your favor - and run in to a
> brick wall?
>
> I read a poker book where the author was saying that truly bad beats
> only happen to "good" players. Well, if that's the case, then last
> night I was the best poker player in the world!
>
> I apologize for ranting like this, but it's preferable to kicking my
> dog ...
>
> Alan C. Lawhon
> Huntsville, Alabama
Remember also that these same players you see consistently at final tables play
many many tournaments as opposed to the joe blows who might play 1-2 a year.
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 07 Dec 2006 02:07:42
From: jgm
Subject: Re: Luck or Skill?
|
<lawhonac@HiWAAY.net > wrote in message
news:1164882769.337661.246610@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> A few hands later I got "lucky" when I managed to
> get all-in [preflop] for 5,000 chips against a guy who declared that he
> had "a good hand" - which turned out to be K-J unsuited. Of course,
> I'm delighted as I have AK of hearts - which pairs up with a King on
> the turn. My "delight" is short-lived though: a Jack comes on the
> river and I'm down to 2,000 chips. (I think I was something like a 4-1
> favorite to win that pot.)
More like somewhere between 5-2 and 3-1.
Shallow stack no limit is a crapshoot, but one where you can have an edge.
It is also not the only form of poker.
|
|
