Which Game Requires Most Talent?

[limon]

i'm currently on a 54 session win streak in pot limit games. its just sick the advantage a good player has over a poor player in pot limit ragrdless of game. to the extent i will be happy to let a emotionally challenged opponent make up a game, practice it for a month, and i will take him on cold if the game is deep stack pot limit.

[wiggs73]

[ QUOTE ]
What game and game conditions require the most talent? In other words, what game (stud, nl holdem, limit holdem, omaha, draw, etc.) and game conditions (sng tourney, multitable tourney, heads up, ring game, b and r, online, shorthanded, fullhanded, heads up, etc.) can be least played with a formulaic strategy and therefore difficult to teach, thus requiring talent and "cardsense"?

We know that 1-table SNGs and tournaments can be beat with formulas that would allow a newbie to not be too dominated by a pro. Razz, lo-ball, and jacks or better can also be beat with a near formulaic strategy. Therefore, these don't require much talent, just study and practice.

My guess is that the game and game conditions that requires the most talent (aka, is the least teachable) is very deep stack heads up no limit holdem played at brick and mortar with both players facing each other, with no dark glasses and walkmans allowed.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'd vote for 2-7 triple draw and high limit 7 card stud.

though i wouldn't consider HU hold em to be easy by any stretch, if you can manage to put your opponent on a calling range (ie what hands he is willing to call a push with), you can show profit just by pushing hands that are +EV against this range.

[gergery]

The key principles are 1) how many decisions must you make, 2) what is the cost of a wrong decision, and 3) how much information do you have to make your decision on

So,
What game can least be played with a formulaic strategy?
Probably some version of 7 card stud, since with more information available and more streets to make decisions on, there would be more rules (ie. formula) needed.

What game is most difficult to teach?
Probably Pot or NL holdem, since so much of your success there relies on hand reading which is situational and opponent dependent. Obviously, hand reading is critical at all forms of poker, but the value you can get from good hand reading is much higher in pot limit/NL games. And putting your opponent on a hand range based on many viewings of their hand is more difficult. And hand reading seems more difficult to teach than any other poker concept I can come up with.

I’d also think cash games require more talent than tourneys, short-handed requires more talent than full-ring, live requires more talent than internet, pot limit requires more talent than NL which requires more talent than limit – due to the principles above.

-g

[SmackinYaUp]

[ QUOTE ]
you can show profit just by pushing hands that are +EV against this range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea but if you applied this idea to a bot, you'd have to realize that your opponents will go through different phases throughout a session that change his calling range. Can't just say "push XX and above when the board reads XXX." And I would think it would be especially difficult to program a bot that could react to an opponent who is able to purposely change gears.