chess or poker

[siegfriedandroy]

any good chess advice on the best way for a 'newbie' to improve? i am going through a book now called 'starting out- ruy lopez'. it seems good, but not sure how much it will really improve my game...

[ QUOTE ]
Samo,
I am decent at chess (2300ELO, last tournament performance almost 2500) and I suck at poker. So I would say poker is more difficult from my perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

[siegfriedandroy]

is this all true!? dam, samoleus is my new hero!! what is your chess ranking samo?

[ QUOTE ]
Probably chess, although poker against near-perfect opponents would get pretty deep.

Quick Recap on Samoleus, for those who haven't been keeping up:

Uber 49/27ish super-successful LAG, to the tune of 6 million+

Pro Soccer player

Pro Chess Player

Holds down job + family

Donates 2 mil to cancer research + drops 2 mil on a crib

Has the most unbelievable parlay of events in a 6 hour session (far beyond any powerball odds)

Planet of origin still unknown

[/ QUOTE ]

[Megenoita]

From reading all of these posts, I think several errors in thinking are being (repeatedly) displayed:

*Poker is a game that involves elements of chance, therefore it must require less skill than chess, which has no element of chance. -This does not have to follow, and for many reasons. My first reason is that poker is not a "game of chance", but a game that involves chance. The game of poker is a game of skill. The better player makes better decisions, and theoretically (not results), he is superior every time he plays a weaker villain, whether he wins or loses that particular time. If you fast forward or fiat the "long run", the skilled player wins 100%; the better player wins always, just like in chess (whoever performs better). That's not a game of chance. The lottery is a game of chance. The short term element of chance in poker is throwing people off here. Secondly, it can be argued, and I agree, that chess does involve chance in some ways, due to the mental state and emotions of players, as well as possibly other elements. I've heard GMs state that there is luck in chess, just as much as in poker (could find the quote but don't feel like it).

*Chess is more complicated, therefore requires more skill. This is not necessarily true (that it is more complicated) at the highest levels, but even if it is, it doesn't mean that it therefore requires more skill. The psychological factors in poker are profound and wonderfully complex. The truly best players can wage an admirable war. Because it's a game of knowing the mind of another, it doesn't need near infinite complexity to match the game of chess. It requires the skill of knowing the mind of another, not knowing the possibilities that a board holds. The truth is, and I believe this can't be disputed, that poker can require more skill than chess. Whether it actually gets to that level, I don't know, and certainly it does not except for the very highest levels and best players. But it can.

I like Jennifer Harman. She has such great instincts. She just understands how people think. She doesn't know why to the point where she can articulate it well, and I don't even think she quantifies it to herself while she plays. She has said that she doesn't even know what amounts to bet most of the time, and she doesn't do much math in her head. Yet she can sit with anyone in the world in the best cash games and hold her own.

To counter that point, I would argue that pattern recognition alone reveals so much information that it's relatively easy to win against anyone in poker compared to beating Kasparov in chess.

Oh wow, homework time...

[Butso]

Interesting question.

Theory: When comparing strategic games it is normal to consider the outcome when the two players respond optimally to each others strategy.

In this case poker is 'harder', since chess has an EV of 0, and poker an EV of 0 minus rake for each player.

Real world: The question is essentially about comparing the quality of opponents at equivalent levels in the two games, i.e. the extent to which players strategies deviate from optimal choices. I think chess is the harder one in this case because of the reasons, IQ corr., etc, listed in this thread.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
obviously chess, not even remotely close. Ask any titled chessplayer and I'm pretty sure they will give you the same answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dan Harrington was a chess champ, along with backgammon I think too. I forget what he said, if anything, about which is more demanding skillwise, but I would guess he prefers poker as the more interesting challenge

[/ QUOTE ]


Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but Harrington said in print, and IM paraphrasing somewhat, but that "Chess is a much better game than poker" and chess is much more difficult. Of course the problem is there is no money in chess, as is going to be the case with any game that is so "difficult".

[CopTHIS]

This is 100% clear to me: as far as skill goes chess>bridge>poker

[Megenoita]

Does anyone agree with this:

"Because the human mind is even more complex than the possibilities of the chess board, and since poker allows for infinite maneuvers of the mind through countless strategic implementations, it must be true that poker can theoretically be played at the same or higher level in terms of skill as Kasparov plays chess. Whether this actually happens is unknown by myself."

[innerpeace]

having been active in both the chess tournament circuit and poker (mostly cash game circuit) over the years, i have definitely given thought to this interesting question.

before proceeding, to add to the list, gm walter browne used to play poker quite frequently and if he did poorly in a tournament would complain that it was due to having played poker all night. i may be mistaken, but i believe walter competed in the 50k horse event this year.

getting back to the question. i think it depends on your working definition of skill. it would, in my opinion, be impossible for someone to become a world class chess player without a tremendous amount of study. i.e., no strong chess player can brag about never having read a chess book, but you see many good poker players make these claims.

on the other hand, i think one can potentially accomplish the same in poker with less work. but, i think the reason is that poker requires skills which can't often be explicitly learned, but which one tends to just have or develop, like the ability to read your opponents, or a situation and then play in accordance with your read.

even though the space of possible board positions in chess is quite large, in poker the number of situations is even greater since you have to take your opponents mind set into account. this is why it would be difficult to write a computer program to do well at most forms of poker. the search space would essentially be infinite. (for similar reasons, there are no good programs for the game of go - the search space is too large.)

so, to sum - i think chess requires more acquired skill, but poker requires more innate/intangible skill. anyway, have to get going, otherwise i would post more.

interesting thread, i hope it continues to be active.

[samoleus]

Hi guys,

I am really inspired by the amount of discussion this post has generated. I was going to just fire off a few superficial words and be done with it, but given the interest that this has generated, I am going to write a very thorough post providing my comparisons between chess and poker in full detail.

To do this justice, I'll have to do this when I have more time. So I'll have to put this off until I have the time. But if you are intersted, be on the lookout - I plan on putting a lot of time and thought into that post.

Quick answer to the soccer question. I played for Keflavik FC in the Icelandic professional league before a severe ankle injury cut short my career in 1997. I also toiled on the end of the bench for the Dallas Burn in the inaugural season of Major League Soccer for just a couple of weeks - but that hardly counts. So my soccer career was not nearly as glorious as I like to daydream, but it was still great while it lasted.

Anyway, more about the chess/poker thing soon.

[adi]

[ QUOTE ]
I played for Keflavik FC in the Icelandic professional league

[/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]