Poker IQ Test - Results & Discussion

[Teddie]

Got about 114 when i took the test about 4 months ago, took it again 2 weeks ago and got 131.

My thinking of the game and situations has defintily improvd alot, but would say i am quite ready for NL 1k.

Th fact i have spent most of my time posting in the FR forum has probaly been the main reason i have improved on my score.

[lucky_mf]

I got a 114 and I crush 400NL and 600NL. Hmm.

I had a hard time with a lot of the questions as I'm used to playing off my own image and not the image(s) of the hero in the test.

Lucky

[Manomanman]

Are you crushing 400NL live or online? I can't imagine beating a higher stake online game without a score of 130+.

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you crushing 400NL live or online? I can't imagine beating a higher stake online game without a score of 130+.

[/ QUOTE ]

Online of course. This is what I did over the weekend.

Lucky

[carddown]

[ QUOTE ]

What I would like to do is discuss your results, and see if as a group we think the test is valid.

[/ QUOTE ]
Asking test-takers about the validity of the test is about as useful as asking Zodiac believers about the integrity of their horoscopes. What we really need is verification from a reliable source. The Donkey Test folks seem to also be hawking IQ tests online. I just can't believe on faith alone that this is a reliable means of testing for Poker smarts or IQ. If anyone has reviews of the test from major authors or players, I'd be very interested in seeing it them.

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What I would like to do is discuss your results, and see if as a group we think the test is valid.

[/ QUOTE ]
Asking test-takers about the validity of the test is about as useful as asking Zodiac believers about the integrity of their horoscopes. What we really need is verification from a reliable source. The Donkey Test folks seem to also be hawking IQ tests online. I just can't believe on faith alone that this is a reliable means of testing for Poker smarts or IQ. If anyone has reviews of the test from major authors or players, I'd be very interested in seeing it them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems valid to ask test takers what games they play, how they perform in those games, and how they did on the test. My own sense is that people who score very high on the test are probably pretty good players, but that there are also very good players who did not score very well.

In the test you are placed in the shoes of a player that doesn't play very well and then asked what you would do in various situations that this player finds himself in. Someone who answers these questions correctly is demonstrating general poker intelligence. Someone who gives 2nd best answers to these questions may be very competent at managing the types of decisions they face as a player, but not so good at putting themselves in someone else's shoes. They have good specific poker intelligence, but not so good general poker intelligence. Some of these people with lower scores are still going to be big winners. This is my sense anyway.

Lucky

BTW - when I take an online IQ test it says I'm one step up from a watermelon, but I'm smart enough to have a Ph.D in economics from one of the top programs in the country. lol @ IQ test.

[mark100net]

I got a 121. And I got interrupted for 15-20 minutes so I took that much longer (according to other people this hurt my score).

I have been playing poker less than two months (prior to that I have never played more than once or twice a year). This causes me to question the validity of the results. Although I am encouraged, I know I have much to learn.

In the last couple months I have been playing online regularly and reading HOH. I have been playing mostly micro tournaments and am slightly ahead at one site and down at another.

[Manomanman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What I would like to do is discuss your results, and see if as a group we think the test is valid.

[/ QUOTE ]
Asking test-takers about the validity of the test is about as useful as asking Zodiac believers about the integrity of their horoscopes. What we really need is verification from a reliable source. The Donkey Test folks seem to also be hawking IQ tests online. I just can't believe on faith alone that this is a reliable means of testing for Poker smarts or IQ. If anyone has reviews of the test from major authors or players, I'd be very interested in seeing it them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I somewhat disagree. If you want to examine the validity of the test, you need do nothing more than correlate the results of the test with something outside of the test, in this case, 1) what stakes you play, 2) how much $$ you make. This *should* be a straightforward, objective task. Also, we should be able to trust that posters are being honest.

With that being said, I somewhat agree with your point about the test not truly being valid --- I believe there are a lot of things they left out that predict success in the poker world. Poker smarts =/= profits.

Conclusion, I do believe a player's knowledge of the game is loosely correlated with success, just not super-strongly.

Edit: Your comment about the zodiac thing also applies to the professional players - if there's a bias in the test, I'm willing to bet that the top pros are the ones least likely to be able to point out any shortcomings, as the test seems to be written from a high-level professional point of view.

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
If anyone has reviews of the test from major authors or players, I'd be very interested in seeing it them.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the donkey test homepage there are quotes praising the Donkey Test from Taylor Caby, BLdSWtTRs, and Pr1nnyraid. These guys are all top HSNL professionals. I value the poker thinking of any of these players over any author.


[ QUOTE ]
I believe there are a lot of things they left out that predict success in the poker world. Poker smarts =/= profits.

Conclusion, I do believe a player's knowledge of the game is loosely correlated with success, just not super-strongly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Knowledge of the game + emotional control-stability + bankroll management equals $ in the poker world. The thing about the test is it doesn't test for the type of knowledge that is most important for poker success. Someone with a decent preflop play who understands their image, how other players will respond to it, and can devise strategies for exploiting these responses should do pretty well in shorthanded NL play provided they don't tilt hard or often.

Lucky

[Manomanman]

LOL Donkaments.