What percent of internet Bitcoin poker is Luck vs Skill?

[TippingPoint]

This is a gambling forum, and most of you gamble somewhere with Bitcoin, so I am curious what percent of internet Bitcoin poker you think is luck vs skill?  

• Do you even consider internet Bitcoin poker to be gambling?  
• Are you more comfortable gambling against the house?
• Is poker too much action or not enough action?

[dznuts85]

Poker is 50% luck+50% skill.  2 - 3 cards can beat pair of A's if you know how to play and read your opponents mind

[fox19891989]

Player VS player poker is the most fair gamble in the world, at least there is no house edge, not like other gamble games, always have house edges.

I voted for 25% luck, 75% skill. "luck is a part of skill" Good poker players always win, even they have bad luck.

If we play 10 hands against Phil Ivey, I am afraid we would lose 9 hands or lose all.

[WhatTheGox]

If we play 10 hands against Phil Ivey, I am afraid we would lose 9 hands or lose all.

Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage, its more that better players have a bigger edge the longer you play them.  Any weak player could beat phil ivey over even 1000 hands.

So in the short term poker is about luck and very little skill.  In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck.

[katerniko1]

25%luck and 75% skill

[BitBOOM]

Depends how you look at it. Over 1 game or day luck has more of a factor. Over the course of several months/years skill has more of a factor.

[fox19891989]

If we play 10 hands against Phil Ivey, I am afraid we would lose 9 hands or lose all.

Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage, its more that better players have a bigger edge the longer you play them.  Any weak player could beat phil ivey over even 1000 hands.

So in the short term poker is about luck and very little skill.  In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck.

Totally agree with "Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage" and "In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck", playing against famous pros likes playing against a casino game has 99%+ house edge. And I watch high stakes poker, great pros like Phil ivey and Tom Dwan won more than loss, weaker pro players hardly win ONE HAND against those famous pros(Phil ivey, Johnny Chan and Tom Dwan).

Imagine we play against him in heads up. He just needs to bet all of our bankroll, and we dare not call when we have bad hands, and he easily get our blinds. Just playing several hands, our money would be run out.  

[sherbyspark]

It is impossible to give a number to this. Each street matters in poker and luck factor changes on each street. A Skilled player will always get it in with the odds favoring him. Luck only determines your starting hand, and the streets that open up. The play in between is skill and there isn't a way to give a number to it.
And Internet bitcoin poker is no different than normal poker.

[erpbridge]

There are way to many variables in the game to determine how much of it is luck . Each street in the game dictates and changes the luck percentage.

[Amph]

poker skill is overestimated, there is more luck involved, especially in tournament

it also depends who fights who, if two good players fight each other then the luck will rise more, because skill is about equal

otherwise if the difference is too big, one can see more "skill from the experience player" but in reality is the noobs that don't know how to play...

[Wendigo]

Poker is (almost) All Luck because it's gambling. If you have the skill you would be playing chess and beating Magnus Carlsen. Oh wait 
Even the poker pros can't win on a consistent basis.

[WhatTheGox]

If we play 10 hands against Phil Ivey, I am afraid we would lose 9 hands or lose all.

Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage, its more that better players have a bigger edge the longer you play them.  Any weak player could beat phil ivey over even 1000 hands.

So in the short term poker is about luck and very little skill.  In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck.

Totally agree with "Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage" and "In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck", playing against famous pros likes playing against a casino game has 99%+ house edge. And I watch high stakes poker, great pros like Phil ivey and Tom Dwan won more than loss, weaker pro players hardly win ONE HAND against those famous pros(Phil ivey, Johnny Chan and Tom Dwan).

Imagine we play against him in heads up. He just needs to bet all of our bankroll, and we dare not call when we have bad hands, and he easily get our blinds. Just playing several hands, our money would be run out.  

heads up is different i dont know how weak the player in question is but yes a very weak player would likely never beat a pro over 1k hands HU.

In a 6max game a fish can win over 1k hands vs a table of sharks.  If they are total mega fish with really no clue then yeah i guess they cant even win that way.

[WhatTheGox]

poker skill is overestimated, there is more luck involved, especially in tournament

Yeah MTT luck could really define your career, if you only ever played 1 or 2 large tournaments, a big win could set your poker career up.

Its all about sustained volume if you have an edge.

[twister]

If you're talking about ring games then I'd say it's 50-50 but if you're talking about freerolls then it's all luck, no skills involved there. People just donk-betting because they don't have anything to lose.

[WhatTheGox]

If you're talking about ring games then I'd say it's 50-50 but if you're talking about freerolls then it's all luck, no skills involved there. People just donk-betting because they don't have anything to lose.

Then you can just play tight and pwn them hard. 

Play tight when they loose, play loose when they tight.

[WearsMyLiberty]

Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage, its more that better players have a bigger edge the longer you play them.  Any weak player could beat phil ivey over even 1000 hands.

So in the short term poker is about luck and very little skill.  In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck.

Agree that there's more luck short term, more skill long term.  There really isn't a way to put a certain number % on it though.

1000 hands in a normal game is a small sample, but HU against a top player like Ivey 1000 hands seems like a lot though.

Against an actual weak player I feel like Ivey would be a large favorite over 1000 hands.  Something like 100 might be closer.  It's an interesting thought expirement, but we agree on the basic idea.

It's a good thing though.  It means that anyone, with any skill level, can play for fun and win on any given night. 

That's what makes poker possible, online and live.  If the best hand/player always won, the games would die. 

But in the long run, over a large sample, if you are more skilled than the people you are playing against you will win.

[leen93]

short run poker is 99.9% luck
in the long run after many games this luck goes away (in the long run you are lucky [49.999 - 50.001] % of the times) so then it's near to 100% skill.

[goose20]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the size of your bankroll.

Poker is a completely different proposition at the 10cent level than it is at the $10,000 level.

Similarly, I'm sure you'd play differently in a $1000 buy in if it was all the money you had compared to if you had a million dollars.

If someone gave you $1M and said you had to win $1k a week, almost any half decent poker player could do it....so is it luck, skill, or size of bankroll?? Hmmm

[Ingatqhvq]

This is a gambling forum, and most of you gamble somewhere with Bitcoin, so I am curious what percent of internet Bitcoin poker you think is luck vs skill?  

I vote for Poker is 50% Luck, 50% Skill,.
If you only have one of them, you may lost your money.

[goose20]

If we play 10 hands against Phil Ivey, I am afraid we would lose 9 hands or lose all.

Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage, its more that better players have a bigger edge the longer you play them.  Any weak player could beat phil ivey over even 1000 hands.

So in the short term poker is about luck and very little skill.  In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck.

Totally agree with "Phil ivey would only have a certain % of advantage" and "In the long term poker is about skill and very little luck", playing against famous pros likes playing against a casino game has 99%+ house edge. And I watch high stakes poker, great pros like Phil ivey and Tom Dwan won more than loss, weaker pro players hardly win ONE HAND against those famous pros(Phil ivey, Johnny Chan and Tom Dwan).

Imagine we play against him in heads up. He just needs to bet all of our bankroll, and we dare not call when we have bad hands, and he easily get our blinds. Just playing several hands, our money would be run out.  

Why dont you just play your position and bet all in against him and make him fold - the blinds are yours???