[Max Buyin]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're wrong.

Chess is different than poker--so? Which one requires more skill?

Poker has a lot of facets to work with that aren't available in chess--and vice versa. Like posted above, there are many more options and thousands of more combinations possible in a period of a chess game than there are in poker.

I don't think you establish why it's key that chess is a game of complete information, and poker isn't. And to a certain extent, chess is not a game of complete information. Suppose I'm playing one of the million lines of Ruy Lopez, and I want to play a certain novelty...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I may not have been able to make the point as clear as I would like it to be. In this instance, if I look up your line in ECO Busted or something, chances are I will never fall prey to it again. In poker, the same instance can come up again and again, but the correct decision is not always the same.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."

Yes but mistakes are made in chess due to incomplete analysis of the board. This is why I say that the myriad difference in chess is that there is no missing information. There is no guessing as to what your opponent may have, and to an extent, what he is planning. In poker, eventually, you'll have to let the odds take your side in the long haul, independant on the information that is missing.


To make my point, I think chess requires the greater amount of skill. Both games are won by the mistakes of others, but it is alot easier to recover from your mistakes in poker, than in chess. Besides, I don't know of any good chess player who actively seeks out weaker players to beat, and avoids stronger players. (yes, I am aware that some people are ranking whores, but they'll only land themselves in trouble with an unjustified ranking) However most of poker is about the earn. Playing weaker players is ideal for success in poker. Beating stronger players is the only way to succeed in chess.