Is poker a game of chance or skill?

[mrbigA]

I think it depends on the stake level. If you play micro stakes, where everyone is just flying their chips and going all in all the time, we will need more luck, because although you can beat most of them, there will always be the one that will eventually win.
If you are in high stakes, then is mostly skill. Those guys live from poker, so I can't say that people can consistently be the lucky one.
But even in the micro stakes, if you have a good bankroll management you can play long enough so that the luck factor is reduced.

So for me poker is mostly skill.

If you play micro stakes and everyone is flying in their chips with any hand you just sit tight until you have decent hands and you'll have a nice win rate in a game like that.  Play tight when others are loose play loose when others are tight.

Totally agree. But the question is that, nowadays, how much is "micro stakes"?

[1715140562]

1715140562

[1715140562]

1715140562

[1715140562]

1715140562

[1715140562]

1715140562

[Slark]

What do you think: http://mrbiga.com/freeroll-three-of-a-kind-vs-straight/

poker is a game based on science because in most cases you have nothing lucky if you could play your opponent as he wants

what branch of science is poker related to?

I am curious to know

It is different if you are playing online or live poker. With online poker there is only part skills involved: mathematic is the key here. Ability to count cards, what cards are in your hand, probability of income and knowing what cards are left in the deck. Logical thinking is another skill involved. But with live poker there are more - you need to be good at reading your opponents - so psychology is important.

[WhatTheGox]

I think it depends on the stake level. If you play micro stakes, where everyone is just flying their chips and going all in all the time, we will need more luck, because although you can beat most of them, there will always be the one that will eventually win.
If you are in high stakes, then is mostly skill. Those guys live from poker, so I can't say that people can consistently be the lucky one.
But even in the micro stakes, if you have a good bankroll management you can play long enough so that the luck factor is reduced.

So for me poker is mostly skill.

If you play micro stakes and everyone is flying in their chips with any hand you just sit tight until you have decent hands and you'll have a nice win rate in a game like that.  Play tight when others are loose play loose when others are tight.

Totally agree. But the question is that, nowadays, how much is "micro stakes"?

Well i guess since its a global game the micro stakes are lower than you'd think since even a game like $0.10/0.25 blinds can play semi decent.  Probably only games like 0.01/0.02 can turn into crazy games where everyone can be a bad player at a single table.

[hodlmybtc]

Long term poker is a skill game 100%

Short term a lot of luck is involved.

Pro's play hundreds of thousands of hands or thousands of tournaments before they draw any meaningful conclusions about their winrate.

[Winalunt]

its a game of both skill and luck, first you need luck for good cards and then skills to play it wisely
if you have skills, you can play good with average cards

[subSTRATA]

Long term poker is a skill game 100%

Short term a lot of luck is involved.

Pro's play hundreds of thousands of hands or thousands of tournaments before they draw any meaningful conclusions about their winrate.

i agree 100%. a professional poker player (consistent 6 figure+ income annually) should depend solely on their skill and know that they will make a profit in the long run.

[masterzino]

It is skill game where you can win only if you have luck.

[hodlmybtc]

its a game of both skill and luck, first you need luck for good cards and then skills to play it wisely
if you have skills, you can play good with average cards

In the long run everyone gets aces or 72 offsuit as much as the other, so yes the ones who play their cards the best win in the end.

[hodlmybtc]

Skill to trick people, maybe; besides that it is pure luck (statistics, if you prefer to put it that way). Of course basic logics are required...

I posted this graph from an high stakes player some time ago in another thread:



Thats over 300 thousand hands, now you tell me this is pure luck?

[Hexcoin]

skill and luck but IMO it requires 80% skill and only 20% for luck

[nickaizoku]

its require skill!! with just luck its useless, but if got skill and worse card can win it

[subSTRATA]

Skill to trick people, maybe; besides that it is pure luck (statistics, if you prefer to put it that way). Of course basic logics are required...

I posted this graph from an high stakes player some time ago in another thread:

[im g]http://edge1.pokerlistings.com/assets/photos/2bengrundyPLO2.jpg?t=1269379105[/img]

Thats over 300 thousand hands, now you tell me this is pure luck?

two things that come to mind: someone that has no idea what theyre talking about and wants to sound like they do, or signature spamming without even putting a modicum of thought into their post, or both. either  way, that picture should pretty much solidify the notion that poker is all skill, maybe 1-3% luck at most, given an unnatural order of dealt cards for an extended period of time. however, the people who can play poker at that level to make a consistent income from it are extremely few.

[fox19891989]

Skill to trick people, maybe; besides that it is pure luck (statistics, if you prefer to put it that way). Of course basic logics are required...

I posted this graph from an high stakes player some time ago in another thread:

[im g]http://edge1.pokerlistings.com/assets/photos/2bengrundyPLO2.jpg?t=1269379105[/img]

Thats over 300 thousand hands, now you tell me this is pure luck?

two things that come to mind: someone that has no idea what theyre talking about and wants to sound like they do, or signature spamming without even putting a modicum of thought into their post, or both. either  way, that picture should pretty much solidify the notion that poker is all skill, maybe 1-3% luck at most, given an unnatural order of dealt cards for an extended period of time. however, the people who can play poker at that level to make a consistent income from it are extremely few.

Yeah, of course poker is a skill based game, that's why Phil Hellmuth, phil ivey, John Chan got so many champions, but not other LUCKY guys, they have best skills, no wonder they can be the best players, I don't think they are lucky players, I have watched their videos, what I can see is that they are super talented on poker, they can judge opponents' hands very easily and accurately, it is totally skills and experienced.

[subSTRATA]

Skill to trick people, maybe; besides that it is pure luck (statistics, if you prefer to put it that way). Of course basic logics are required...

I posted this graph from an high stakes player some time ago in another thread:

[im g]http://edge1.pokerlistings.com/assets/photos/2bengrundyPLO2.jpg?t=1269379105[/img]

Thats over 300 thousand hands, now you tell me this is pure luck?

two things that come to mind: someone that has no idea what theyre talking about and wants to sound like they do, or signature spamming without even putting a modicum of thought into their post, or both. either  way, that picture should pretty much solidify the notion that poker is all skill, maybe 1-3% luck at most, given an unnatural order of dealt cards for an extended period of time. however, the people who can play poker at that level to make a consistent income from it are extremely few.

Yeah, of course poker is a skill based game, that's why Phil Hellmuth, phil ivey, John Chan got so many champions, but not other LUCKY guys, they have best skills, no wonder they can be the best players, I don't think they are lucky players, I have watched their videos, what I can see is that they are super talented on poker, they can judge opponents' hands very easily and accurately, it is totally skills and experienced.

thanks for bringing up that point; experience is almost as important as skill in poker; it might help you notice just the small things, but in the actual game, small things can be the difference between folding on someone's bluff and taking the pot.

[bitbaby]

Poker when played with your OWN money on ring tables etc is 80% skills and 20% luck but when played on freeroll tables, it's reverse of that because when you play with your own money you try to play the game more sincerely and weigh in your cards before betting but in freerolls because people don't have anything to lose they just keep donking in every bet. If you want to be a good poker player, just start playing on small ring tables with your own money and that will improve your game. You can play a 1000 freerolls and win a few here and there but you wouldn't gain any poker skills.

[WhatTheGox]

Skill to trick people, maybe; besides that it is pure luck (statistics, if you prefer to put it that way). Of course basic logics are required...

I posted this graph from an high stakes player some time ago in another thread:



Thats over 300 thousand hands, now you tell me this is pure luck?

Yeah thats impressive numbers and proves the point, i actually did have graphs with several million career hands all going up smoothly 30 degree angle etc.

Cash game poker on the long term is 100% skill.

[Falconer]

Poker when played with your OWN money on ring tables etc is 80% skills and 20% luck but when played on freeroll tables, it's reverse of that because when you play with your own money you try to play the game more sincerely and weigh in your cards before betting but in freerolls because people don't have anything to lose they just keep donking in every bet. If you want to be a good poker player, just start playing on small ring tables with your own money and that will improve your game. You can play a 1000 freerolls and win a few here and there but you wouldn't gain any poker skills.

Thats a good point but sometimes people dont want to waste their time to play poker, so they will play seriously although it just freerolls. Poker is one of the gambling that take a long time in playing, and it will be a regret if they get losing in the end after spend much times. But yeah, with our own money, we will play more carefully.

[Sponsoredby15]

Its refers to your skill specially in bluffing you need to divert your opponents mind into your game play so that you can trick them. But be careful in bluffing because it will easily lose you in a game. Confident is a mass but not too much. Just manage your chips. Thats it.

[danskepankki]

Skill takes 70%, luck takes 20%, psychology takes 10%. You will win in the long term if you have comprehensive skills, high iq, high eq and so forth. Short term poker is a lucky game.

[Dr.Osh]

What do you think: http://mrbiga.com/freeroll-three-of-a-kind-vs-straight/

poker is a game based on science because in most cases you have nothing lucky if you could play your opponent as he wants

what branch of science is poker related to?

I am curious to know

It is different if you are playing online or live poker. With online poker there is only part skills involved: mathematic is the key here. Ability to count cards, what cards are in your hand, probability of income and knowing what cards are left in the deck. Logical thinking is another skill involved. But with live poker there are more - you need to be good at reading your opponents - so psychology is important.

I agree, playing poker related to knowledge about mathematics and psychology to know your opponents. This card game depends on 85% skills and 15% luck, even if you have good skills but always get bad cards it's nothing.