[yvesaint]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Poker is 90% luck"

what's your reply to that?

[/ QUOTE ]

i used the following analogy to my brother's gfs folks.

imagine two players, the best in the world and the worst player in the world.

they play one hand. what % of the results from this match is luck? probably like 60/40 or something.

now they play 100 hands. then 1000, then 100000 etc.

eventually the limit of the ratio of Luck/Skill goes to 0 as the # of hands played in this setup goes to infinity.

so "poker is 90% luck" isn't a specific enough statement to really respond to other than to explain the example above.

in the long run, poker is skill. in the short run, it's large portion of luck.

another determinant of the "amt of luck" in poker is your own personal sharpe ratio (ratio of expectation divided by your standard deviation). as that ratio increases, the "amt of luck" in the short term decreases to some minimum non zero value.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

i heard a better analogy on here once

poker is like a game of chess for $1. except after the game, you flip a coin for $100. at the end of the day, whether you win or lose is dependent on the coin flip.

at the end of your life, whether you win or lose is dependent on your chess skill.