| Author |
Message |
Jack Sparrow 24 High Card
Joined: 10 May 2008 Posts: 17 Location: Fresno, California
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: Skill To Luck Ratio |
|
|
I think there is a lot of bad poker being played on this site and all the rest of them online. Not to mention the small buy in home games that thousands of people play each weekend around the country/world. If you seat a table full of professional poker players, the skill to luck ratio has to be pretty close to 80:20. 80% skill is involved around that table and only 20% luck. Sure bad beats happen day in and day out at ANY poker table but at some of these lower level buy in games there are way too many people in the hand that really shouldn't be. The skill to luck ratio has to be somewhere near 50:50. There are just too many people that are playing crap hands and end up winning the pot cuz of some lucky cards come for them and they end up taking the pot. For example: I just don't see anyone having any business being in the hand when they have 9,3 offsuit in first position. (Unless they are trying to bluff at the pot and push everyone out of the hand). Even in cash games. But you see it day in and day out, someone limping in with 9,3 offsuit in early position and then end up calling a raise before the flop, only to hit a 3 on the flop and play it all the way thru and get a miracle 9 on the river to crack someone's Aces. I guess my point to this rant is that when you're playing low buy in games with a bunch of people that don't understand 1/50th of what poker strategy is all about, you have a 50/50 shot at winning the hand that you're in. Even if you're pocket aces are a 85% favorite to win before the flop. Unfortunately my lifestyle cannot afford to play in bigger buy in games, but I'm surely accumulating money in my account so I can play in bigger games. Hopefully that bad play will subside a whole lot when playing at those tables. Good luck to me, and good luck to everyone who is witnessing the same things as I am at the lower level tables.
I absolutely cannot stand Phil Helmuth but I do have to give him credit for what he said once, "If it wasn't for luck, I'd win every hand."
Your thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flying_Kiwi Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 6522 Location: somewhere spacific
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's 50/50. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Badlydrawnboy Flush
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 Posts: 127
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't know who it was that said it, but "At the higher levels, the bad players don't become better, they just become tighter".
So it will become more difficult to extract money from them playing 93o.
I guess playing the low stakes is essentially a lesson in how not to overplay good starting hands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Blackray Full House
Joined: 20 Mar 2008 Posts: 169 Location: Bergen, Norway
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| As Sklansky says in SSHL, your profit comes from your opponents mistakes. It's a common misconception by losing players to think that they'll be winning players at higher stakes where "people respect your raises and cbet's". |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alex089 High Card
Joined: 30 Jan 2008 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the luck to skill ratio is a matter of opinion.
I was watching a high stakes cash game recently and "Devilfish" said that Holdem was 40% skill and 60% luck.
As for Phil Helmuth, well his attitude and persona say more about him than I ever could. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jack Sparrow 24 High Card
Joined: 10 May 2008 Posts: 17 Location: Fresno, California
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Badlydrawnboy wrote: |
Don't know who it was that said it, but "At the higher levels, the bad players don't become better, they just become tighter".
So it will become more difficult to extract money from them playing 93o.
I guess playing the low stakes is essentially a lesson in how not to overplay good starting hands. |
If they become tighter at higher level games, they won't be in the hand with 9,3 offsuit. Problem of bad poker solved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
StevieWard Message Board Junkie
Joined: 12 Jul 2007 Posts: 1552
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 75/25. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Badlydrawnboy Flush
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 Posts: 127
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jack Sparrow 24 wrote: |
| Badlydrawnboy wrote: |
Don't know who it was that said it, but "At the higher levels, the bad players don't become better, they just become tighter".
So it will become more difficult to extract money from them playing 93o.
I guess playing the low stakes is essentially a lesson in how not to overplay good starting hands. |
If they become tighter at higher level games, they won't be in the hand with 9,3 offsuit. Problem of bad poker solved. |
And a new problem born: how to make money now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RunnerJohn Two Pair
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Posts: 70 Location: Cartersville, Georgia
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a theory about the skill to luck ratio. It's my own opinion, of course, but it seems common sense to me.
If everyone at a table is of equal skill, then luck has to be a much bigger factor.
If you put 9 sharks at a table (of equal or close skill level), then you'll probably see a very tight game. The winner will be the one who gets the better cards (luck).
If you put 9 fish at a table (of equal or no skill), then you'll probably see a fairly wild game. The winner will be the one who hits the best flops, turns, and rivers (luck).
If you put 9 people of varying levels of skill at a table, then skill will be the determining factor. The higher the skill level of the player, the more likely that player will end up winning.
Doesn't that just make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gamblingparlour Flush
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 Posts: 147
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| At first I figured it was something like 70/30 skill to luck ratio, but the more experienced I am becoming the more I reckon it's more like 50/50. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dcdoorknob Message Board Junkie
Joined: 11 May 2007 Posts: 1128 Location: Mississippi
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gamblingparlour wrote: |
| At first I figured it was something like 70/30 skill to luck ratio, but the more experienced I am becoming the more I reckon it's more like 50/50. |
That's odd, the more experienced I get the more I realize how much skill is involved. It might have something to do with how one makes use of said experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gamblingparlour Flush
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 Posts: 147
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dcdoorknob wrote: |
| gamblingparlour wrote: |
| At first I figured it was something like 70/30 skill to luck ratio, but the more experienced I am becoming the more I reckon it's more like 50/50. |
That's odd, the more experienced I get the more I realize how much skill is involved. It might have something to do with how one makes use of said experience. |
Let's play heads up you shark. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|