Which Game Requires Most Talent?

[Shaman]

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.

[vypremik]

I would think that NL Holdem requires more talent than most games. Of course it also allows for a variety of winning playing styles.

I think tournaments require more playing style than regular tables, especially freeze-outs. You've got only one shot and you need to make it count.

Face to face requires more skills than an on-line game (although there are some skills to on-line play that face to face does not have). In particular you need to both use tells and defend against them.

I think mid-level stacks require more skill play than big or short stacks in tourneys. Big stacks have a lot of lee-way and can afford to make a few mistakes. Short stacks have very few options and are dictated more by the table and the cards than by skill.

Finally, I think a four to six handed table requires more skills than heads-up play. There are so many playable cards and so many strategies you can use. It requires a lot of knowledge about the players and their stlyes. Heads-up is more of a game of guts with a taste of caution mixed in. Nine and ten player tables are more about waiting for opportunities and position.

Not that I am saying other games don't require a high level of skill, but I think a five-handed NLHE live tourney table with approximately equal mid-level stacks requires a lot of skill to navigate through. That would be my vote.

[bobbyi]

There is no right answer to this question because different games require different sorts of talent. It's like asking whether golf requires more talent than basketball (to paraphrase Tommy Angelo).

[Shaman]

Anything that can easily be taught requires less talent than something where you need to be intuitive. Obvious example: Very deep stack NL holdem vs. 5 card draw jacks or better.

[Rudbaeck]

PL7CS with incredibly deep stacks has to rank pretty damn high on that list. However, it's almost never played.

No form of HU poker is going to rank high, as they can actually be fully solved mathematically. (Yes, including deep stack NL hold'em.) It has to be atleast a threehanded game.

The decently often played game that I struggle the most with is shorthanded PL Omaha.

[cantloseon22]

5 handed Pot Limit Omaha
5 handed Pot Limit Holdem

[RoundTower]

[ QUOTE ]
5 handed Pot Limit 6 card Omaha

[/ QUOTE ]

[SmackinYaUp]

[ QUOTE ]

No form of HU poker is going to rank high, as they can actually be fully solved mathematically. (Yes, including deep stack NL hold'em.) It has to be atleast a threehanded game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you explain this more please? I don't quite buy it yet.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Anything that can easily be taught requires less talent than something where you need to be intuitive.

[/ QUOTE ]
So rock paper scissors requires more "talent" than chess?

[TexArcher]

Different skills for different games. No more, no less, just different...