Poll: Poker - Luck or Skill based game?

[Nouw]

You could have a royal flush but with no skill you could blow it.

You need both but skill is more important as you need skill to win. Of course no skill doesn't mean you don't know how to play... does it?

 

[PokerTakesSkillz]

Whether or not something is skill or luck based is defined by play at it's highest level.

Hopeless Bastard, pokers highest levels confirm it's skill based..

[http://bit.ly/cjEVcn ]
(Notehil Ivey has been winning millions in poker before this graph even existed, so he was never "in the red.")

If you can't intuitively grasp the concepts of how poker is skill based (at the basics):

If someones betting too frequently, call looser.
If they don't call enough, bluff looser.
If they don't bluff enough, call tighter.
If they call to frequently, value bet thin never bluff.
Putting people on a range of hands instead of 1 hand is more efficient.

Then you would definitely have a problem grasping the higher concepts of the theory of poker metagame, triple barrel bluffs, razor thin hero calls, reverse implied odds, etc.
You sound like someone who's played less than 50,000 hands of poker. I understand your ignorance, "Oh god shut up. Poker is entirely luck based."
It's skill based FWIW, even if the skill is over your head and beyond your current given comprehension.

Poker is BOTH skill and luck.

Any long-term results reflect 100% of your skill.(Over 25k hands for cash games should reflect a true win rate.)
Any given hand is 100% luck based results.(Or any given session, or week even.)

Again, this should also come intuitively however it apparently does not to a large number of people. Anybody interested in learning how to play poker, join twoplustwo.com, by far the worlds largest most intellectual poker forum and online community, with a ridiculous amount of active members.

 

[Yureina]

Where is the "both" option?

 

[cerebus23]

Both period.

 

[Plurralbles]

have you ever watched the world poker tour?

"Many say it's based on luck, but then why are the same faces constantly showing up at the final table?"

 

[dbltrouble89]

Skill. If it were entirely up to luck, casinos wouldn't get their panties in a twist over card counting.

 

[Rand-m]

I fully respect poker, and I enjoy both watching and playing. However, In a world where Tom Dwan, appropriately aka'ed "Durrrr", can rank among elites by using some of the most ridiculous tactics that make him seem amateur, I'm gonna have to side with luck.

 

[PokerTakesSkillz]

rank among elites by using some of the most ridiculous tactics that make him seem amateur.

Using ridiculous tactics that make him "seem amateur" is why durrr is able to trick everyone into giving him millions.
High-stakes poker players make maneuvers that winning medium and small stakes winners don't understand. They are in another complex skill spectrum entirely.

Durrr started with 50$ btw so if it was luck, he has had an unbelievable luck streak that statistically would go far beyond winning the lotto. More like winning the lotto 100 times in a row.

 

[Deofuta]

You may have the luck to get a great hand. But it takes skill to milk it for all its worth.

 

[Pinkros]

Very much luck with a bit of skill.

 

[PokerTakesSkillz]

"THATS EVEN MOAR SKILLZ!!" Uh? No. If its that easy to fuck people up, then theres no skill involved at all.

By picking up the aggression, and bluffing a couple pots. You lose credit and bet, re-pop someones all in bluff, stacking them.
People have been doing this before Tom Dwan was even born, he is just ONE of the masters at playing Loose/Aggressive "LAGG." (Playing hands that are technically in -EV situations, but gain future rewards so they are +EV long run.)- - - This takes A LOT of poker experience... This is the skill right here, most WINNING Tight/Aggressive players lose money trying to learn LAGG, and give up sticking with their TAG style. Only the best can really get a handle on it. (I.E. probably not you )

[http://bit.ly/92RZLa ]

^^ Another example of poker at it's highest level "OMGClayAiken" showing that it is indeed, skill based results over the LONG-TERM (Note his worst day -.5M). He plays a similar style to Durrr, and has made millions. Is he an idiot also? Talk about something you have "MOAR" knowledge about perhaps...? Do you even have ONE hand example you think Tom Dwan Misplayed? Hmmm?

You're a poker idiot confirmed, make an account on Pokerstars and pm me, I want to 1v1 you (after all I am a HUSNG specialist) and post the results for this thread. 50/50 shot! right Mr. "Its all luck"? I doubt you have the BALLS, or the $$, but I would love the action if your up for it kid.

And earlier, I was using the phrase "loose" as in "that bolt is loose."
It's referring to a wider range of hand. The opposite of "tight", a small range of hands. As in "Hey that girl has a tight ass!"
If "looser" in my reply earlier doesn't roll off your tongue as nicely as "wider range of hands" well, try not reading it out loud. Just a thought

And you're whole "Art" example was really pretty retarded. Looking forward to playing you.

 

[Miumaru]

Theoretically you can win with any hand if you are skilled enough. Only exception is against anyone who is not stupid who has a Royal Flush.

 

[Low Key]

I'd say it's more of a skill based game because though someone else might have a better hand, you can bluff them into believing your hand is superior. Luck and chance only gets you so far in poker. It's your own will that needs to be honed in order to be effective, and that's based on experience, otherwise known as skill.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

I'm sure I've been ninja'd, or at least I hope, but there needs to be a "Both" option.

 

[Naheal]

Both. Luck is required to actually get what you need and skill in the manipulation of others.

 

[milskidasith]

-snip-

Let me explain your current situation.

You're attempting to explain the power of christ to an atheist. To you, theres countless evidence and anecdotes that confirm what you already believe. To me, its all correlation (without any real evidence of causation) and circular logic.

I attempted to transplant your arguments to another context and it went over your head.

You've done nothing but confirm a solid assertion. The only reason people believe there is skill in poker is because people believe there is skill in poker. An example of perfect circular logic.

People figured out a long time ago the game was completely random. But... its played by people. Who are not random. They can't even come close to being random. So instead of gambling, people do their best to exploit weaknesses inherent in people. Thus, the idea of skill in poker is a con. A scam. Designed to exploit those weak of mind, get them to the table, and take all their money.

Its a system, yes. Its somewhat difficult, sure. But its not the game. Its outside of the game. Its meta-game.

The game is "winning money at poker." The game isn't "getting dealt the right cards." If you're making money at it, you're winning at poker.