Looking for an appropriate challenge to those who say poker's all luck

NYCNative · #1 08-12-2005, 06:16 AM

The Ohio AG made the following comment in a release about what is and isn't considered legal gambling for charity in Ohio:[ QUOTE ]
A game of chance includes poker, black jack or any other game in which a player gives up anything of value in the hope of gain, the outcome of which is determined largely by chance.

[/ QUOTE ]I made the following overly emotional statement in another forum in response to this:[ QUOTE ]
If poker is "determined largely by chance," how is it that the same players are always on my TV? There are many pro poker players who make livings off of poker alone and the same can be said for blackjack - why are there no pro slot machine players?

I challenge Jim Petro to sit down at a poker table with two of his Neocon cronies and three of the best poker players in the Rat Pack [note: The Rat pack is a local group of poker players in central Ohio] in whatever games and stakes and formats they want. The money they win above their buy-in will go to the charity of their choice. The money we win above the buy-in will go to the Ohio Democratic Party. If it's "determined largely by chance," they have as good a chance as us, right?

[/ QUOTE ]Now, it occured to me that if I was going to want to initiate some kind of challenge that it should fit the following criteria:

a) Demonstrate that poker is not "determined largely by chance."

b) Do so in a relatively short period of time since politicians and the media are all about sound bites.

Is it possible that I can come up with some kind of challenge that would show that poker is a game of skill that still manages to hedge my bets against the luck factor which is admittedly more prominent with smaller sample sizes?

silvershade · #2 08-12-2005, 07:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
b) Do so in a relatively short period of time since politicians and the media are all about sound bites.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that in the short run poker is indeed largely about chance. We should be thankful for that as it camouflages the good players advantage, I know I prefer my opponents to believe that I'm a luckbox rather than that any skill is involved.

BZ_Zorro · #3 08-12-2005, 07:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The money we win above the buy-in will go to the Ohio Democratic Party. If it's "determined largely by chance," they have as good a chance as us, right?

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, they do.

The good players just know when their chance of winning is greater (and bet at those times), or when they're being laid sufficient odds relative to the amount wagered and the likelihood of winning. This is no different to sports betting.

[ QUOTE ]
A game of chance includes poker, black jack or any other game in which a player gives up anything of value in the hope of gain, the outcome of which is determined largely by chance.

[/ QUOTE ]
This definition is perfectly accurate. On each hand you wager money on an outcome is unknown and determined largely by chance. The fact that good players bet on chances which are > 50% (or less than 50% getting X:1 odds), doesn't change that fact.

There is no challenge to come up with because you're missing the point of the above definition.

einbert · #4 08-12-2005, 08:38 AM

And why would you want people to think that poker is a game of skill?

Guernica4000 · #5 08-12-2005, 09:03 AM

Remember Phil's quote "If it wasn't for luck, I’d win every time" Even the pros agree that luck is a big factor in the game, ESPECIALLY in the short run.

NYCNative · #6 08-12-2005, 09:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
And why would you want people to think that poker is a game of skill?

[/ QUOTE ]So that it can be legalized here, of course.

NYCNative · #7 08-12-2005, 09:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There is no challenge to come up with because you're missing the point of the above definition.

[/ QUOTE ]So you have table A with Doyle Brunson, Phil Helmuth, Jesus Ferguson, Phil Ivey and Annie Duke and table B with five players who know the ryules to NLHE from playing free games online. You are asked, "which table would you like to sit down at," and your reply will naturally be "pick the table randomly from a hat because I stand an equal chance to win at either table."

djoyce003 · #8 08-12-2005, 11:16 AM

well a headsup challenge with a significant amount of big bets in each persons starting hand should do the trick. Something like 1000 BB's and you play till someone has them all. That oughta cover any luck in the short term...assuming you know how to play headsup well because they certainly won't.

I think people are missing the point on whether it's determined by chance. The outcome of a HAND is determined by chance, but the amount won/lost on said outcome is determined by SKILL. That is the difference....yeah if you took doyle brunson, and some average moron, and just dealt hands to each one, the moron would win the same # of hands over the long term...but he'd lose more on his bad ones, and win less on his good ones because he's a moron.

BZ_Zorro · #9 08-12-2005, 11:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
>And why would you want people to think that poker is a game of skill?

So that it can be legalized here, of course.

[/ QUOTE ]
This says it all. Why do otherwise intelligent people put blinders on when they want something?

[ QUOTE ]
So you have table A with Doyle Brunson, Phil Helmuth, Jesus Ferguson, Phil Ivey and Annie Duke and table B with five players who know the ryules to NLHE from playing free games online. You are asked, "which table would you like to sit down at," and your reply will naturally be "pick the table randomly from a hat because I stand an equal chance to win at either table."

[/ QUOTE ]
You can win money in the long term playing slot machines with a sound mathematical strategy. Are slot machines a game of skill? Or would they be better classified as gambling/a game of chance?

The bottom line is this:

In poker, you're wagering something of value where the outcome of each wager is largely determined by chance.

That you can do it a million times with a small edge each time doesn't mean jack. It's still a game of chance. You can do exactly the same with sports betting/ horse racing if you're intelligent, it's still considered gambling.

mikehildebrand · #10 08-12-2005, 01:31 PM

Its all moot anyway, there isn't a politician who is going to accept any challenge on this. I am 100% certain the AG knows that there is skill and intelligence involved in any game of chance (anything to get the edge), however, in his position do you really think there is a challenge that he will accept? Not in reality, usning his logic, he has an equal amount of a chance to lose the challenge and look like a fool as he does to win and prove his point. Not going to happen.
I do believe there is a lot of skill in poker, but I also dance with luck, because I tell you, there are times when i think it would be more profitable to flip a coin 100 times and take my 50/50.