|
|
#21
05-29-2007, 05:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. I can get $ in as a favorite many times and still lose money. Slanksly/Galfond bux over the short term are skill. But they have to be averaged in OVER TIME to match results with expectation. [/ QUOTE ] This is just wrong. People often confuse variance with bad play. If someone plays 200nl as their top limit, that means they have a razor thin edge against their competition, and thus the big swings. Most of the down in those big swings comes not from variance, but from people playing better than they are. If your edge over a game is 2BB/100, then you're going to have huge swings in variance. If your edge is 15BB/100, not so much. Variance does not mean "I played every hand as well as it could be played and still lost money." What it means is "I have some sort of an edge in a game, only it hasn't shown itself in the results in whatever time period." The vast majority of the variance is not caused by bad luck, but by lack of skill. How many losing sessions do you think aba is gonna have at nl100? I'm gonna go with like never. Salazar, obviously in games with like skilled players (like high stakes) there are going to be large swings, and since the players are so closely matched it will take a while for those razor thin edges that some have to show themselves out. This does not mean that poker isn't a game of skill though. It just means that when the players are pretty much even, anyone can win on a given night...just like any other competitive anything. Even skill levels does not equal luck. 
|
|
#22
05-29-2007, 05:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] At $10 NL, I will win 9 out of 10 sessions, consistently. At $1000 NL I will win 1 out of 10 sessions. Please tell me how that fits into your "poker-is-luck" theory.
|
|
#23
05-29-2007, 06:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] At $10 NL, I will win 9 out of 10 sessions, consistently. At $1000 NL I will win 1 out of 10 sessions. [/ QUOTE ] you must have really long sessions if this is true.
|
|
#24
05-29-2007, 06:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] At $10 NL, I will win 9 out of 10 sessions, consistently. At $1000 NL I will win 1 out of 10 sessions. [/ QUOTE ] you must have really long sessions if this is true. [/ QUOTE ] You'd have to be a relatively novice player to lose money at 10nl for more than a few hundred hands. The players will stack off will unbelievable hands, never do anything unpredictable, and use a "I HAVE THE FKIN NUTS" line when they get a hand.
|
|
#25
05-29-2007, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] At $10 NL, I will win 9 out of 10 sessions, consistently. At $1000 NL I will win 1 out of 10 sessions. [/ QUOTE ] you must have really long sessions if this is true. [/ QUOTE ] You'd have to be a relatively novice player to lose money at 10nl for more than a few hundred hands. The players will stack off will unbelievable hands, never do anything unpredictable, and use a "I HAVE THE FKIN NUTS" line when they get a hand. [/ QUOTE ] i know a lot about ssnl. the 90% and 10% numbers are too far apart.
|
|
#27
05-30-2007, 11:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Poker RESULTS over the short term are luck. You are crazy if you think otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] At $10 NL, I will win 9 out of 10 sessions, consistently. At $1000 NL I will win 1 out of 10 sessions. [/ QUOTE ] you must have really long sessions if this is true. [/ QUOTE ] You'd have to be a relatively novice player to lose money at 10nl for more than a few hundred hands. The players will stack off will unbelievable hands, never do anything unpredictable, and use a "I HAVE THE FKIN NUTS" line when they get a hand. [/ QUOTE ] i know a lot about ssnl. the 90% and 10% numbers are too far apart. [/ QUOTE ] Actually, I've only played (in moments of sheer stupidity) $1000 NL 6 times, and I've won none of those times. So, I was being generous at 10%. I made an assumption that I might perhaps win 1 time in the next 4. Regardless of the true numbers, the point is that I can consistently beat $10 and not $1000. How does that fit the "poker is luck" theory? It's the same game.
|
|
#28
05-30-2007, 11:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Poker is Luck
[ QUOTE ]
SALAZARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRR [/ QUOTE ] SALAZARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can never overemphasize emphasis.
|
|
#29
05-30-2007, 05:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Poker is Luck
[ QUOTE ]
In the short term, poker is mostly chance. [/ QUOTE ] Poker is not "mostly chance" in the short-term. A game is either chance or skill, it can't be one or the other, and it can't be all luck one day, but then two weeks later its suddenly skill. Poker is about determining/estimating how much value your opponent believes his hand possesses, and comparing that value to the value of your hand. This is a skill based task. People who don't do this are playing games of chance, but when I swing a golf club I am playing a game of chance because I suck at golf and never learned proper technique. Does the fact that I suck at golf mean golf is a game of chance?
|
|
#30
05-30-2007, 06:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Premise is False
[ QUOTE ]
You'd have to be a relatively novice player to lose money at 10nl for more than a few hundred hands. The players will stack off will unbelievable hands, never do anything unpredictable, and use a "I HAVE THE FKIN NUTS" line when they get a hand. [/ QUOTE ] I would say this is true if you are comparing your winrate to the other players and discounting rake. Rake can be tough to beat in anything $25 and lower on-line in certain games, and probably any live limit game under $5/$10, my datebase has my rake at 9.3PTBB/100 in the $25PLO over a large sample, which, IMO, is pretty sick. I beat those levels and moved up, but honestly it wasn't always easy to beat the the house. I am digressing, but basically I think the "anyone should crush the micro's except a retard" line is BS
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
