Poll: Is poker primarily a game of skill or chance

On another thread I asked if poker is gambling, and we got bogged down in semantics. This question is perhaps more to the point. Obviously the game has elements of both. But in your opinion, which best describes the game: a game of skill or a game of chance?

skill

The best answer I've heard is that in the short run, it's primarily luck and in the long run, primarily skill.

1 hand is dependant on chance.

1,000,000 hands are dependant on skill.

When luck shuts the door, you gotta squeeze in by the window. Thats were the skills comes in.

Assuming we're talking about the long term view and not simply some segment in time, then skill wins out.

The question itself is a sort of red herring. This is like asking "Is surfing done with a board or a wave?" It's just that its not as obviously goofy as that question. It is more subtly goofy.

Poker is most certainly a game of chance.

Expert players use SKILL to manage, harness and deal with chance the same way a surfer uses his surf board to ride waves.

For beginning and poor players it is primarily a game of chance with occasional moments of inspiration which can be substituted for skill.

Winning players are still playing a game of chance... but they use SKILL (knowledge, math, logic, people skills, perception, statistics) to beat it.

cAPS

I'm surprised you voted SKILL since you say "Poker is most certainly a game of chance."

And sorry if you think my question is goofy. But it's a pretty common discussion among players.

From a freeroll perspective.....with alot of players......I say it is both......Without the cards (chance) your skill will not do you much good. So, even with your knowledge and skill of the game, employing your tactics, exploiting their weakness', with that many people I think chance has just as much to do with the game as your skill.

Study hard.....practice what you study...and benefit from the rewards

I think you're looking at lower skill level, saying it is obviously more luck in those cases, then defining poker in those cases as a game of chance. That's an incorrect conclusion. It doesn't become a game of chance simply because of a low skilled player playing the game. That's like saying basketball is a game of chance because I played against Michael Jordan. Obviously that's not true. My skill level was dwarfed by him, but the game remained a game of skill.

Activities are, by definition, categorized as games of skill or games of chance regardless of the skill level of those participating. Poker is no less a game of skill just because someone sits down at the table for the first time. And craps will always be a game of chance even if the shooter has been doing it for 50 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_of_chance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_of_skill

The definitions are mutually exclusive and everything can be categorized into one or the other. Football = Game of Skill, Basketball = Game of Skill, Craps = Game of Chance, etc. So I guess the easy way of saying it is what is the overall guiding factor in the infinite long run? Skill or Chance? In poker, in the infinite long run, it is skill that will triumph.

I didn't mean to insult you for your question. Sorry. I see why it looks that way. Sorry.

Of course I am familiar with the question... I just think there is a fundamental error in the thinking that chance and skill are polar opposites in every game.

What I mean though, I still hold to:

The motive force for poker is based on chance.
The method for winning consistently at poker is based on skill.

The reason I chose skill in the poll is because I answered the spirit of the question which, imho is: Is poker mastered through chance or skill. It is obviously skill.

cAPS

Luck in the short term, skill in the long term

The thing about freerolls and large tourneys, you are correct - a lot of luck is involved. And a highly skilled player can go card dead and have virtually no chance of winning. But one tourney does not a poker career make. The skill set involved in tourney play is different than that involved in cash play, but there is nevertheless a skill set. It probably takes a pretty decent player to win a big tourney like the WSOP, but it is conceivable that a moron could have a lucky streak and win it in any given year (at least that's what I pin my hopes on).

But just as the unit of play for the cash game player is the hand, the unit of play for the tourney player is the tourney - which is a finite composite of hands. The very best cash game player can lose any hand, even if he's 95% favored. But over the long run, he almost certainly will win. The very best tourney player may not win a given tourney, or even most tourneys, but he will win or finish higher than me on a consistent basis. After thousands of tourneys, the skilled tourney player is going to be near the top, while the luck bastards and suckout artists will rank lower.

Conclusion: even in tourney play - skill trumps luck in the long run.

I think that deep stack tourneys are more conducive to skill full play, internet tourneys with stacks of 1,500 or less, turbos etc, are much more dependent on luck,

Well you can talk all you want about skill, but 'I WOULD RATHER BE LUCKY THAN GOOD'

There will always be advocates for either position. I certainly would not consider the game to be one of pure skill, however there are almost limitless methods and tactics to maximize your chances of winning in any concievable situation. As with most things in life, that is what separates the pros from the amateurs.

i agree here, in a live time full of poker everyone gets the same hands. Its just how you play with your hands that makes you a fish or a shark.

Depends what player you are talking about...

Luck plays a role in many aspects of life, even though we are reluctant to admit it. So, luck is a factor in poker. One way to distinguish between the luck and skill elements is to think of the difference between poker and showdown. Obviously, showdown is pure luck. The cards are dealt face up, high hand wins. In poker incorporates the presence of incomplete information. The player's ability to provide the best estimate of that incomplete information is where skill enters the equation.

If poker was a game of pure chance, the same playrs would not win time and time again.

Most things in life have an eliment of chance. You set up your own business - you are taking a chance.

Poker is like the stock market - it is a calcultated risk.

In the past 12 months, I have shown a profit in 10 of them and lost in 2. I am way up in the $$$ stakes. I know I am not that lucky, so it must be down to a certain amount of making the correct move at the right time - this is the skill factor in poker.

Some of you have said that the lower the stakes the more luck is involved? I don`t agree.

What happens is that you will get more hands bust, but, over time, you win. Also, lower level stake MTT, more players are involved, so it sees like they suck out more.

Just my opinion.

Just a thought.

This week I started well, so it was all skill.

Today has been poop, so all the other players were lucky

Poker is like the stock market - it is a calcultated risk.

Thats it.

What he said.

Those of us who gave it a modicum of thought knew what you meant by your original question in the other thread and, yes, the answer is still "skill".

Think about it like this: if you could see your opponent's hole cards and had any basic knowledge of the game, you would win a tournament 99.9999% of the time by picking your spots. This demonstrates that poker is a game of skill because if you had "perfect" skill, it would be an advantage as great or greater than seeing your opponent's hole cards.

The only reason chance comes in is because players' skill levels are relatively equal. If someone were able to read people so well that he/she could figure out what they had every hand or were able to manipulate people so well that he/she could get others to make a call or fold (like Gold did in 2006), that person would be able to win almost every time, regardless of what cards they were dealt.

Three years ago I lost money at online poker and made regular deposits

Two years ago I stopped having to make deposits and occasionally got to withdraw

I now withdraw every month

Have I got luckier over the last couple of years ? No

Game of skill

Definitely skill, otherwise you don't know how to play AA

Skill. Ones who learn and play pick up the skill faster then just playing poker with out learning it first.

i think
75% skill 25% chance

one hand of poker is chance , do you get AA and flop an A or 23 and flop 223 or 75 and hit air . winning in the long run will come down to skill as everyone who plays enough hand will see the same situations the same starting hands same types of flops and how you play them will make a difference imho

the best evidence that its skill is that there are poker pros, and they win alot of the times...if it was luck, then there cant be a pro and different people would be winning all the time. But there is still some luck involved

Poker is definitely a game of skill. However, winning big money in a large tournament has a high degree of chance. Many things have to happen just right to win a large tournament especially among skillful opponents.

Suppose Major League Baseball, assuming a fair distribution of players, had 6,000 teams. How often would your team win the World Series?

Skill. I love the votes for chance, no monkeys here