I told u poker was 99% luck !!!

Ronaldadio

Ronaldadio

Legend
So guys, this caused problems b4, but I have some stats now.

35 MTT played over 2 weeks.

Either forced all in or pushed all in at some stage in tourny (Final table in 5 of them, no wins)

out of the 35 I was ahead at showdown on 27 occasions.

Of the 27 17 were pre flop, the other 10 after the flop. The other 7 where I was behind was the same.

Out of the 7 I was behind I won 6.
Out of the 27 I was ahead I won 9.

So first things first, I feel that my judgement must be good as I am ahead at showdown 80% of the time.

But I do think, regardless what anyone says, poker is 99% luck and at best 1% skill/ judgement/ balls.

The reason is that because of the popularity of poker now, you can`t shake some people off!!!

This is backed by David Sklansky`s article on his `system` where he told a player who had never played b4 to do the following:-

"If someone else has raised in front of u, move all in with AA, KK, AKs. Otherwise fold.

If no one else if front of you has raised, all in with any pair, ant Axs, AK or any suited connector apart from 34s and 23s"

This in the main, is for $25 plus buy in tournys - people don`t wanna be out to early. After the early rounds you should have built up a nice stack, or you will be out!!!

So, this is what happens now on line. Even the 1% advantage is under threat, because that is based on people making sensible decisions, not the nuttas and fish u get playing on line!!!

Also, to save people the bother, the reason I think the `top players` get there is because:- People like Doyle Brunson were quality players who played when the game was much different.

The newer players have hit it lucky in a comp, won $500,000+ and can afford to gamble.

Well, as usual, your comments are always appreciated.

Ronaldadio
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
ok, try playing 500 or 1000 MTTs, then see if your results are the same. I'm sorry ronaldadio, but your sample size is still too small.

out of the 35 I was ahead at showdown on 27 occasions.


...so you won 27 of the 35 sample hands?
I'm sorry, but your stats aren't clear, my friend
 
shortstacked

shortstacked

Visionary
i do feel that theres alittle more luck playing online as to live games, but I play both live and online and theres about the same, only differnce is in live games you can see that person face
 
poettic1

poettic1

Guest
actually you're 6/7 or 86% of you lucky hands, and 9/27 or 1/3 or 33% skill. or in both cases 24/34 or 70% luck. that is the exact number allot of pros claim poker is.

they say that this is the same number for everyone. it is the plays in between the lucky ones that define a player
 
blankoblanco

blankoblanco

plays poker on hard mode
Ronaldadio said:
The reason is that because of the popularity of poker now, you can`t shake some people off!!!

No kidding. Your job is to figure out who you can or can't shake off. Find the calling stations. Find the people who know what they're doing. Find the loose players, find the tight players.

I suspect you have, in fact, experienced some bad luck that should even out over the long-term. I've experienced a lot of the same junk over the past few days.

If poker is 1% skill and 99% luck, explain to me how nearly every regular member here is a profitable player (I'm making an assumption, but I'm sure that I'm right). Cardschat members are just abnormally lucky?
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
It`s the nature of MTTs.

To reach the money in an average MTT, where the top 10 percent get paid, you`re going to have to increase your chip stack to at least 5 or 6 times your starting stack, 10 times would be better.

Some of this can be done by winning smaller pots but, realistically, you need to win at least 3 all-ins.

I try never to get involved in an allin unless I`m a 70/30 favourite and I`m happy to say that, when the cards go down, it`s rare that I`ve made a bad call and find myself underdog. However, even if I judge it right every time, that still means I`m going out nearly one time in 3.

So, if I expect to play 3 all-ins and expect to lose one in three, it follows that my expected result is ......... knocked out ! :(

Basically, you need to be both play well AND be lucky to do well in any particular MTT. That`s the bad news.

The good news is - if you play a lot of them and you are a sound player you can have a realistic expectation of winning long term. The luck evens out.
 
k4tr1na

k4tr1na

Rising Star
i find good hands stand up better in live play .................online you will always get people who call with crap .......so based on this , internet poker (unless its a high buy in ) will always have an element of luck about it
 
Beriac

Beriac

Guest
k4tr1na said:
i find good hands stand up better in live play .................online you will always get people who call with crap .......so based on this , internet poker (unless its a high buy in ) will always have an element of luck about it

What I don't understand is why people believe that this is a bad thing. People calling your great hands with crap is great and the reason it's possible to play online profitably.

As great poker players say, you can't get a bad beat if you weren't in there with a better hand and you can't suck out if you weren't in there with a worse hand. So the very act of getting a bad beat means you are potentially more skilled than your opponent and thus destined to take his or her money over time.

People complain about bad beats, which I totally understand from a frustration perspective, but over the long-term if you're not getting bad beats then you're not outplaying your opponents. And if it seems like you're taking more beats than delivering them, that just means you're more often in there with the better hand, which I promise you is a good thing.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Beriac said:
What I don't understand is why people believe that this is a bad thing. People calling your great hands with crap is great and the reason it's possible to play online profitably.

Amen.
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Beriac said:
People complain about bad beats, which I totally understand from a frustration perspective, but over the long-term if you're not getting bad beats then you're not outplaying your opponents. And if it seems like you're taking more beats than delivering them, that just means you're more often in there with the better hand, which I promise you is a good thing.

Well put. I agree absolutely.

When an idiot makes a dumb call and gets lucky, other players often start moaning at him through the chat box. That annoys me. Don`t tell him he`s playing badly, we need him to keep on doing it. He`s unlikely to be lucky again next time. ;)
 
HoldemChamp

HoldemChamp

Rock Star
ChuckTs said:
ok, try playing 500 or 1000 MTTs, then see if your results are the same. I'm sorry ronaldadio, but your sample size is still too small.

I couldn't have said it better than Chuck. But, I will expand on it a bit.

35 MTT is not even close to a proper number of tournaments to base any kind of theory about luck being 99% of poker.

Poker theory is based on millions of hands. Your 35 MTTs are a drop in the bucket. Certainly a bad streak. But, that's all just a bad streak.

I sat down at a ring game and I saw this one guy drag pot after pot playing absolute trash. He took me for a good chunk of my money at that table when he outdrew me 5 times in a row. I still have yet to get all my money back.

He took a lot from the rest of the table as well. But, he pushed his luck and ended up giving it all back and more. Why? Because he had no idea what he was doing. He was likely the worst player at the table. He was just getting incredibly luck. Then when his luck ran out he kept playing those bad hands and paid for it dearly. Lost all his winnings and every penny he should up to the table with.

Luck in poker is an anomaly. It will happen. Bad players will have these kind of streaks. But, they will not win in the long run because they are bad players.

Good players will get caught in the bad players crosshairs from time to time. And marginally decent ones like myself will suffer their luck as well. But, in the long run good players will win over them. Not with luck. But, with skill.

Think about the :turtle: and the hare. The hare had any easy win. All he had to do was waltz to the finish line. But, instead he decided to take a nap. So, the :turtle: ended up winning.

So we can say the hare the equivilant to the bad player. And the nap is equivilent to playing bad hands.
 
T

thechern

Rock Star
HoldemChamp said:
Think about the :turtle: and the hare. The hare had any easy win. All he had to do was waltz to the finish line. But, instead he decided to take a nap. So, the :turtle: ended up winning.

So we can say the hare the equivilant to the bad player. And the nap is equivilent to playing bad hands.

But didnt the hare get lose off in the forest because he was going to fast?

If the other people are playing bad hands at the table then dont try to bluff them out of a pot. Be really agressive with the good hands and get a few callers and if you hit on the flop make them pay for it they will wither give you their chips or fold. You don't have to have the highest stack with 200 people left in a tournament to land in the money. Its all about survival. Only play the good hands it will pay off for you.
 
HoldemChamp

HoldemChamp

Rock Star
BKrywk01,

Keep thinking that way. It means more money for the rest of us.
 
Top