Arc the day you can tell the RNG to give you the cards you need it won't all be luck anymore.
Which is what I am doing. "Maximizing my chances". Our methods are different, but the process is the same. You analyze the deal and apply a thought process to put yourself into the best position you think you have in order to win. Otherwise, you would solely rely on the RNG to select all five cards on the draw.
It isn't "all" luck any day. Even you admit to playing correct strategy. If it was all luck then what you hold shouldn't matter. You're out on a limb, Alan. You can't believe in optimal strategy and claim it's all luck. Those are two conflicting beliefs. It's called cognitive dissonance and you've got it bad.`
The fact is the skill in playing good strategies is almost as important as the skill in finding the right plays. If you just kept hitting deal and draw and never holding anything playing BP the return is about 30%. Not quite the 99% you get from playing optimal strategy.
Give it up, Alan.
That's great! I learn something new here all the time. So Stevie Wonder, playing BP, has a 30% return. I always wondered about that. Maybe he could beat his theo and rack up comps -- he should, after all, be able to feel hot and cold machines better than most.
No, I didn't say that, and stop making things up. I hold the cards in video poker, and play the cards in live poker, that give me the best shot at winning. Stop fabricating what you think are my thoughts.
My position is that there is much luck in both video poker and live poker, because even though you use your best judgment, you have no control over the deal or the draw. So again I ask my original question: what is the percentage of luck and what is the percentage of skill in video poker?
My position is quite clear and certain about video poker: it cannot possibly be ALL skill. Up for discussion: how much of it is luck? Since you can't force a video poker machine to fold either through a big bet or a bluff, I suggest that there is more luck in video poker than there is in live poker.
It really doesn't matter what his theoretical return is. He can do as the famous names who sell optimal strategy do (along with their zombie-like math-only followers) and value his comps and "freebies" at whatever he needs it to be in order to claim a "winning" year. Why, who would have thought Jean Scott's bagged buns from Vegas buffets would have the same value as gold?
Even the blind can do that!
Last edited by Rob.Singer; 06-03-2012 at 09:14 PM.
I agree with this. What all players are trying to do is deal with a RANDOM Number Generator, and there is less chance for a player in video poker to use skill than in a game such as live poker.
So would anyone like to offer a percentage for skill and a percentage for luck in video poker? Rob suggested video poker is 5% skill and 95% luck. It's been said that live poker is 20% skill and 80% luck. Since the player can control more of the variables in live poker, my feeling is that video poker must involve more luck than live poker.
Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 06-03-2012 at 11:31 PM.
Two different philosophies to consider here:
First, from a very special lady,
"No, I don't believe in luck.
I don't believe in circumstance no more.
Accidents never happen -- in a perfect world
No, I won't believe in luck."
Blondie
"Accidents Never Happen" from Eat to the Beat
Second:
Chaos theory basically suggests that although cause and effect chains can be established between events, that doesn't require that the events themselves can in any way be predicted.
That's my philosophical contribution for the day. Any further questions about Eastern philosophy should be directed to Richard Gere or, failing that, Alan Mendelson. Thank you....
Alan has no where to hide. He claims VP is luck and and isn't luck. Maybe I should call him Sybil.
And, chaos theory doesn't help. Chaos defines a deterministic situation where, if everything was known, all would be predictable. It is not random. However, because the complexity is so high in these situations there is no way that everything can be known. The real interesting part is that chaotic systems tend to mirror randomness when between attractor states.
Talk about being stuck! You LIVE there....and in more ways than one!
Luck is easily maximized. That's the only purpose of all those special plays that have you so baffled. In your foolish way of playing, get dealt ten hands, play them all "optimally". With special plays, maybe one of the deals gets played for the huge winner, aka LUCK, That's called maximizing your opportunities for good luck to appear.
Redietz, the more you impose your intelligence on arci the more he'll fight back. I kinda enjoy watching him make a fool of himself as do many, many others on all the forums. But once you realize how, because he claims to be GENIUS , it has to be impossible for anybody to ever get the best of him, you'll understand why it eats at him so cruely. And as we've seen time and again here, whenever they do, he just gets so frustrated and goes into namecalling and insult-filled rants....just like a child would do.
Maybe we should call him: Child Genius?
Last edited by Rob.Singer; 06-04-2012 at 10:08 AM.
I concede I "misspoke." Skill is a part of the game because you need skill to handle whatever lucks give you. Now, Arc, give me the percentage of "skill" in the game? Is it 5% skill as Rob suggests? Is it less than the 20% skill factor in live poker that most poker pros believe? Please don't tell me that you think there is more skill in video poker than in live poker.
I already answered this when I broke the problem into two cases. When skill is used to improve the return of a game through optimal play, game selection and improved cash extras, then it is 90-100% over time. Once this level of skill is optimized then luck enters the picture and determines whom among the same skill set will do better. Yes, there are the very extremes at both ends of the bell curve where overlap exists. However, this is not the norm and why the answer isn't 100%.
Skill in VP when viewed from the first case is probably more important than live poker. In live poker the game is equal for all participants whereas the choice of games makes a huge difference in VP. So, in live poker it's closer to the case where all the variables have been equalized in VP. Yes, skill still makes a difference but it is over many, many games. In this case the skill factor is initially more in the 10-20% range but once again grows over time to a much larger percentage.
I've never heard or read anyone assigning skill percentage to poker, but if you can direct me to a discussion or two, that would be cool. I assume most pros would consider skill more important in pot limit hold 'em than in no limit. I am curious, also, if most would assume more skill for seven card stud than for hold 'em, especially since memory comes into play in seven stud as you must memorize the mucked cards each hand as it is played, then flush them from memory after the hand. I suppose what it comes down to is the range of skill found at your usual table for the various games and how that compares to expert play. The range from "Any Idiot" skill in hold 'em to "Expert" is probably less than from "Any Idiot" seven stud to "Expert" seven stud.
Here's a discussion where, for the most part, the "skill element" is between 10% and 30% in live poker:
http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-ta...oker-luck.html
You DID indeed say "VP is not a test of what is the right cards to hold" because I quoted it. VP is all about the test (which is the challenge) to decide if the dealt hand should be changed and which cards to change, if any. Everyone who plays gets to take the test on every dealt hand.
I can't put a percentage of skill vs luck in VP because no one really knows (even if they think they do). Skill is definitely a factor in VP since we all know that skilled players are often advised to take their play elsewhere.
Since I don't play live poker, do those of you who have extensive knowledge of the game and its players know of any situations when a highly skilled player has been banned from a casino because he's too good?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)