Another Idea Regarding Showing Poker Is Mainly "Skill"

[David Sklansky]

There are probably better ways to phrase this but here's the jist:

"The majority of the major decisions during a poker hand, (the decision whether to play at all being normally trivial) are not obvious, a matter of skill, and result in large differences in expected value, with the most skillful decisions having the highest value."

I phrased it this way because it is apparently important to show that results rely more than 50% on skill, rather than luck. Whatever that means. I added the "not obvious" part to distinguish it from games like blackjack where the "skillful" plays are indeed obvious way more than half the time. I didn't consider the first round folds in poker because they are usually so routine and involve so little money that it wouldn't be fair to. Opponents might try to make an issue about that though.

[Dire]

Doesn't this get kind of circular? What proves that the decisions are based on skill and not luck? If a lottery winner claims they based their winning numbers on analysis of previous results and a weighting of results, then they're claiming to have used skill to win. You could show that statistically the decisions you've made have ended up +EV, but the lottery winner could also do the same. And as far as future results or lack thereof, the lottery winner could simply claim high variance.

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
If a lottery winner claims they based their winning numbers on analysis of previous results and a weighting of results

[/ QUOTE ]

Lottery balls have no memory. Future numbers drawn are not impacted at all by any previous numbers drawn.

Les

[Ron Burgundy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a lottery winner claims they based their winning numbers on analysis of previous results and a weighting of results

[/ QUOTE ]

Lottery balls have no memory. Future numbers drawn are not impacted at all by any previous numbers drawn.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Statistics show that more people pick numbers 31 or less, because people tend to pick numbers that match their birthdays/anniversaries/whatever. If you pick numbers all higher than 31, it's more +EV (or less -EV) because there's less chance of having to split the prize money.

One could argue that that involves skill.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
Statistics show that more people pick numbers 31 or less, because people tend to pick numbers that match their birthdays/anniversaries/whatever. If you pick numbers all higher than 31, it's more +EV (or less -EV) because there's less chance of having to split the prize money.

One could argue that that involves skill.

[/ QUOTE ]
Depends...

Once people begin to catch onto that, then they will start picking high numbers also. Then, the low numbers will be +EV. Unless they're all thinking on level 3. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

You want to start metagaming the lottery now?

[alphatmw]

what constitutes a "large difference" in EV? this is another shaky point. also, when talking about EV in this sense, are we saying what the EV is of the actual cards or the EV based on your perceived range of the opponents' hands?

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If a lottery winner claims they based their winning numbers on analysis of previous results and a weighting of results

[/ QUOTE ]

Lottery balls have no memory. Future numbers drawn are not impacted at all by any previous numbers drawn.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

I was trying to give an example of where it's clearly luck, but one could try to argue it was skill. Those that you'd be trying to convince poker is a game of skill may see the OP in a similar light. It looks perfectly reasonable if you accept poker involves skill, but if you don't then it looks like you are saying: "Poker is a game of skill because the decisions involved obviously involve skill."

[ski]

The biggest argument to me is that they are forcing poker players to file taxes as professional gamblers.

I've never heard of a craps, roulette or baccarat player being forced to file as a professional.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest argument to me is that they are forcing poker players to file taxes as professional gamblers.

I've never heard of a craps, roulette or baccarat player being forced to file as a professional.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's selective.

Sports and horse handicappers are required to file as professional gamblers too.

[nineinchal]

Can you please come up with a solution to legalizing online poker? The legislators who can change things don't want to hear your logical argument. They want to know that they can get votes out of this. That's the way this song goes.

NOW GO BACK TO YOUR FORUM!!!

Nineinch