almost all games are a combination of luck and skill. poker is largely controlled by luck. thats why idiots come out of nowhere to beat the best players in the world. imagine if that happened in golf or tennis. those are games of very little luck and lots and lots of skill. poker is a game of maybe equal parts luck and skill. i think it is pretty absurd that legality is determined by whether a game is luck or skill and we actually need to have this discussion. as if a game of luck is somehow immoral or corrupting and should be banned! the whole idea is mind-blowing to me. we have to push hard against all the things the government think it is protecting us from. in almost all cases, we need to reduce the power and size of the government by at lest half. i think we need to get serious about voting libertarian.
Well true luck is a part of poker. However, over the course of time a skilled player will be more successfull. To say that poker is largely controlled by luck is senseless. How so? If you believe that, let me know when ya feeling lucky and bring ya check book down here to the bayou, cher!
Luck is a large part of poker, but the ability to know what a wise play is based on the odds behind each card combination, and the ability to read your opponent are also key, and what truly seperates the amateurs from the pros. I prefer bourre.
Actually it's not "luck" it's a statistical probability that makes poker the game it is. The key to poker is being able to do the math and read other players. Over the course of time everyone catches the same cards and deals with the same situations. The thing that makes poker a skill game is that the pros know when to push and when to lay it down. Actually a person can only get lucky for a short amount of time, a skilled player understands this and waits out that players "rush". Open invitation - Anyone who thinks poker is about luck. Come to my home game or invite me to yours. PLEASE!!!
You and me both. I also am a big time pidro player. Except when people from Lafourche parish are involved. They play that crappy follow suit stuff.
we realize that, we just figure we didnt have to say it. we are aware that luck doesnt actually exist. which would be relevant if we played an infinite amount of times. even though i am terrible at poker, i could positively come to your house and destroy you at it. again, show me another game/sport where a chump who plays online can come to the world series and beat the best players in the world. in fact, hasnt a no-name won the world championship 3 years in a row? why hasnt this happened in golf? how many hands do you think it would take you to prove you are better than a weaker player? if the answer is more than one, how do you account for not winning every hand? you are better right? again, even though i am terrible at poker i could easily beat a superior player on a regular basis, because poker is not largely not a skill game.
Your kidding me right? In the Last 5 years only one real "chump" as you put it has won the WSOP. His name is Chris Money Maker. If he didn't sign that huge LONG TERM endorsement with Pokerstars, he would be broke by now. Because, he has constantly LOST since then. Greg Raymer, is a pro, who just wasn't known to the general public. Alot of the poeple in the industry knew who he was. Greg had 100k a nite wins, before winning the WSOP. Joe Hatchem, a part time pro from Australia, had been playing for 30 years or so. In his home game, he had a bracelet winner, and a couple other cash game pros. Jamie Gold, has been playing for years also. He has been playing medium high stakes cash games in a Brick and Mortar Casino for a few years now. Now granted anyone will tell you that Jamie Gold caught alot of cards. But why did Greg Raymer and Mike Matusow make it that far thru such large feilds in consecituve years? They just the luckiest guys in Vegas 2 years running? No, over the course of a tournament that large, everyone is delt the same combination of cards. So the online chump to win the WSOP the last few years was Chris Moneymaker. Now he got "lucky" but he also made alot of skilled plays. Namely the bluff against Sammy Farha heads up at the final table. Does Tiger Woods win every tourney? The answer is no. Can TW's make a birdie on the same hole every time? No. Is it because he gets unlucky or lucky? Maybe. The thing is poker and golf are both skill games. I don't need a set number of hands to prove this to you. One nite at my home game and you will see. I personally doubt that over the course of time any terrible poker player could consistantly beat a decent poker player. I know it doesn't happen in my home games. The "Fish" as we call them, usually don't come back after losing alot the first nite. For example, Just because you are lucky enough to catch pocket aces does that mean that you can make a large amount of money? Does it mean that you have the skill to make a read to understand that because you played it wrong, you let to many people into a pot and someone hit 2 pair on you? Or flopped a straight/flush or draw? If someone makes the wrong sized bet preflop with aces they usually only win the blinds. Why is that? It's because they are unskilled and don't know to play poker. Even tho this player was lucky enough to be delt AA in that hand. See my point. Luck isn't the main factor. We all know that every "X" amount of hands we will be delt AA. We also know that AA only wins 38% of the time. So how come a pro will constantly make money while ametuers or un-skilled players dont? To say that an unskilled poker player can get lucky and win constantly over time is an assinine statement. I know I am willing to back up my comments with my bankroll. Anyone on the other side of the fence willing to do the same?
i believe he was a patent lawyer, not a poker pro. jamie gold is a tv producer or something. you are claiming everyone is a pro. these guys are chumps who came out of nowhere to beat the greatest players in the world because they got lucky. i guarantee you nobody i havent heard of is going to win the masters this year or any year. holy **** did he ever. i saw him winning hands he should have lost repeatedly. luck. if they were the best, why didnt they win? luck. how come the final table isnt just a collection of the world's best? luck. you think so? how many hands do you think have to be dealt before this is true? does tiger woods get beat by a regular joe accountant from middle america? never. if he were a poker player it would happen to him. nobody said that. i am saying that luck plays a huge part of poker. it is a combination of luck and skill, with far more luck involved than other games/sports. i could never win even a single game against roger federer. but i could pretty easily get further in a tournament than jesus ferguson.
