Poker - Luck vs. Skill from a different angle

candyman718 · #1 03-11-2007, 03:25 AM

I have no doubts that in the long run poker is a game of skill. I have done a lot of thinking on this question due to having to constantly defend my position from family, friends and even other players who think the game is one of luck.

But, there is one thing that has been eating at me for some time now. Most of the players that I think are among the best players in the world are degenerate action junkies. During High Stakes Poker on GSN last season, the all-star lineup was so obsessed with the prop bets ( what cards would come out on the flop) the producers had to ban the prop bets for the next season, because it slowed down the play and dominated the table talk. TJ Cloutier, one of the greatest tournament players of all time has reportedly lost all his winnings at craps tables. Daniel Negraneu plays high stakes golf against seasoned players despite the fact he is just a beginner at the game. Phil Ivey can regularly be found betting obscene amounts in the High Roller BlackJack Pits. Some of the better players on this forum 'coinflip' at the 10/25 NL tables.

Don't my arguments that poker is a game of skill and one of seeking out +EV situations and grinding out a profit lose some of their weight when the best players in the world seem to be constantly seeking out -EV situations in an attempt to make a quick buck?

Sometimes I feel like someone who's backed a politician who preaches family values only to find that he's been caught snorting blow off a hooker's [censored].

alphatmw · #2 03-11-2007, 03:47 AM

no, the two facts are completely unrelated. why would a handful of players' gambling habits change the nature of the game of poker?

candyman718 · #3 03-11-2007, 06:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
no, the two facts are completely unrelated. why would a handful of players' gambling habits change the nature of the game of poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think the NBA and the NFL care about their players off the field activities? Because it reflects badly on the game. Poker exploded because of TV and stars were created. Most of these stars are also degenerate gamblers. Now we are in position where we are trying to get something like a carve out for poker from the online gaming bill and should we have someone like Mike Matasow as a spokesman?

alphatmw · #4 03-11-2007, 07:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no, the two facts are completely unrelated. why would a handful of players' gambling habits change the nature of the game of poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think the NBA and the NFL care about their players off the field activities? Because it reflects badly on the game. Poker exploded because of TV and stars were created. Most of these stars are also degenerate gamblers. Now we are in position where we are trying to get something like a carve out for poker from the online gaming bill and should we have someone like Mike Matasow as a spokesman?

[/ QUOTE ]this post did not once discuss luck vs. skill of poker. what is your actual point here?

IzanDV · #5 03-12-2007, 05:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
no, the two facts are completely unrelated. why would a handful of players' gambling habits change the nature of the game of poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think the NBA and the NFL care about their players off the field activities? Because it reflects badly on the game. Poker exploded because of TV and stars were created. Most of these stars are also degenerate gamblers. Now we are in position where we are trying to get something like a carve out for poker from the online gaming bill and should we have someone like Mike Matasow as a spokesman?

[/ QUOTE ]this post did not once discuss luck vs. skill of poker. what is your actual point here?

[/ QUOTE ]

He (probably) means that if the top-players of poker gamble, everyone will think that every poker-player gambles. And therefore Poker will be seen as pure gambling.(Wich we dont want)

alphatmw · #6 03-12-2007, 01:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He (probably) means that if the top-players of poker gamble, everyone will think that every poker-player gambles. And therefore Poker will be seen as pure gambling.(Wich we dont want)

[/ QUOTE ]would he also say that basketball is a game of pure chance since charles barkley gambles so much?

badatmath · #7 03-11-2007, 03:48 AM

That's like telling them strawberries are healthy, and feeling like your argument is losing weight because a lot of strawberry farmers eat hamburgers often.

Matt Williams · #8 03-11-2007, 04:25 AM

What you don't understand is that the prop bets take up less than .5% of their bankroll. It's like normal guys like us betting $5.

mr_npiv · #9 03-11-2007, 05:01 AM

I don't know about that. I remember during HSP, when Daniel went stuck to like 600k.

At some point as he was climbing back, he said he was even. Although he was down 150k at the table, he had made the rest with the props.

not quite .5%

Matt Williams · #10 03-11-2007, 05:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about that. I remember during HSP, when Daniel went stuck to like 600k.

At some point as he was climbing back, he said he was even. Although he was down 150k at the table, he had made the rest with the props.

not quite .5%

[/ QUOTE ]

He meant even for the night. Not bankroll. Believe me, DN has more than 600K in his bankroll. He probably has closer to $5,000,000 if not $10,000,000 in his bankroll.