[SmokeyJ]

I didn't read all the replies so I don't know if this has been said and i suspect it has, but isn't it possible that a federer or 'perfect' player of poker has actually evolved but can't gain near perfect results or results as good as federer due to the luck and swings involved in poker?

I mean I'm sure if poker magically had no luck involved (can't really see how that's possible lol) wouldnt it be safe to say that the best online players (or player if there is one) would win almost every match they played like federer does? or that ivey would win almost every live match he plays?

I don't really know much about poker so just speculating, and also isn't it the same with chess because chess is a game of perfect knowledge and poker isnt?

Great post though hit on some very good points

Edit: Just had a change of heart and read the replies and someone said it doesn't matter about poker not being perfect information because of a lack of 'complete skills', but how do we know?