I made this it’s own thread as to not hijack the other thread…
Aside from “betting behavior and physical cues/tells” or what have you. I still don’t see the skill…
What math is there to do? You’re dealt a few cards, maybe (depending on the game) everyone gets community cards so at best you get to see 10 cards when all is said and done…how is there skill in guessing what someone else may or may not have? you really don’t know, so you’re gambling on what you “think” someone may have.
You have no influence over what cards you’re dealt so really where is the skill?
If you have a crap hand and bet big attempting to buy the pot your competitors either believe you or they don’t… seems like luck to get them to believe…
Yes. That IS a skill.
To get them to think you have something good when you don’t, or vice versa, so as to influence their betting accordingly.
Again, with shitty players like you and me, yeah, it’s mostly gonna be a game of luck. We get good cards, we get bad cards, and our shitty attempts at bluffing may or may not work against our shitty tablemates.
It absolutely IS a skill. Just like a skilled detective or prosecutor gets a suspect or witness to divulge more than they want to, a good poker player does the same. And the math involved is the math of “probability” (this is true of ALL gambling). The probability that the other guy will improve his hand. The probability that you will improve yours. And so on. Someone that can properly track cards and run the scenarios in their head (which is anyone on a pro circuit) has a massive advantage over their competition.
If it was pure luck, you wouldn’t have some top dogs completely steamrolling the playing field. They’d all win-some-lose-some based on the cards.
I should also say that what cards you get is LUCK. How you collect information and bet accordingly is the skill. And how you effectively control what information you give to other players is another skill.
Card counters for blackjack is a good related matter. It is the only player-against-dealer game where you can create an advantage for yourself. You don’t control what cards come out. But based on your knowledge of what is more likely to come out (high cards vs. low cards) you can control your betting so that you’re betting small when the shoe is cold and betting big when the shoe is hot (dealer more likely to bust, player more likely to win). We are not talking about huge advantages here either. We are talking about a player gaining perhaps a few percentage points above the house when the situation is ideal. That can and does result in huge overall gains for professionals. It’s by no means a guarantee in the short run, but on the long run, yeah . . . . having a 2% (I’m using hypothetical numbers, obviously) edge over the house is going to be a bonanza if you put a few million dollars in play over a long time.
Again, just because normal dipshits like us can’t figure it out or, more accurately, don’t want to dedicate 1000’s of hours to mastering it, doesn’t make these skills any less of a skill.
I guess this is where I stumble with calling it a skill… I’ve watched poker on tv more than a few times and at longer sittings than I’d care to admit but WAAAAAAAAAAAY more often than not the better hand prevails. It would seem all that posturing and nonsense is worth nothing if you’re just gonna call the hand.
^ this makes sense to me and gives me a better idea, I think. because I don’t know what those skill sets are or what they even look like, it just looks like luck to me.
I totally understand the skill set for blackjack, I just don’t see how one could apply that to poker, with what limited knowledge of the other cards the player has there’s no way you could count a poker deck when the only cards you know are your own
I think I’m starting to understand… So, what do these skill sets look like?
I believe you on all of this, but aren’t all of your assumptions and math based on what you concretely know which is only your own hand? If someone has 4 aces or a royal flush don’t all of these tips and skills mean nothing because the player will never fold.
If every player plays like they’re holding 4 aces how does one determine if the player is holding crap?
Yea but quads and royal flushes are super rare, that scenario won’t come up very often. Bluffs happen but no ones playing that wreckless to where they have to pretend to be playing a strong hand all the time, players will catch on to that pretty fast.
Also if it looks like there’s quads or a royal flush on the table and you’re holding something super weak that gets beaten easily, you’re going to fold almost every time. Because why call that?
He’s saying if some dope “bluffs” all the time when he’s holding garbage, it soon becomes clear that his next rounds of “Ooooh, Boy, y’all better watch out! I’M ALL IN!!!” probably don’t mean much either. Someone trying to bluff when they don’t have anything good, is going to be beaten by anyone that doesn’t fall for such bullshit, simply because they’re holding better cards.
You want people to think you have good cards when you have shit and bad cards when you have gold . . . because that affects how THEY bet, and will increase the pot that you win at the end.
I’m not a poker player. I suck at the math, I suck at the high-levels of needed observation and “reading” of other people, and I suck at lying or pretending to not be pissed/disappointed or happy/excited at stuff. Deal me 3 Aces and I’ll probably be like, “WHOOO HOOO!!! FUCK YEAH . . . . uhhhh [frowns] I mean, uhhh, fuck this shit! Who stacked the deck and dealt me this bullshit?” I won’t be able to drive up the pot the way someone who can actually play the game well can. So . . . I’ll still get my “wins” from the RANDOM luck of the cards, as originally noted, but the size of that win is what is controlled by “SKILL”.
When it comes to the “bluffing” stuff, a really easy oversimplification of one side of it is the “Boy who cried wolf” metaphor. If you follow the same dumb pattern and are shown as empty all the time, well . . . . it’s probably not going to work so well in the future, even when you have a situation that you desperately want it too.
That was a good explanation. I get all that about being able to raise the pot and what not… but to specifically go after
That’s kinda my point… Better cards are luck of the draw. So, anyone can ALWAYS play as if they have top cards and if that is always how a player plays how do you determine if they’re holding shit or not? because while of course, they can’t always be holding a royal how do you determine if theyre holding pocket aces or a 2, 3?
You don’t “determine” what cards they have. The only thing that can be actually determined is what cards they DON’T have (based on your own hand). You use the combination of mathematics (statistics/probability) and visual/behavioural clues to make a best guess assumption on what possible hands they likely have and then make bets based on your confidence in either being able to beat them with your cards, or scare them into a fold.
Yeah, that would seem to be pretty hard to do based on what little info you have (you’re own hand) So, at best the skill would come in (based on the hand you have) with what kind of confidence you have in yourself to bluff or lie your way into getting someone to believe you… but if no one believes you it all comes down to the cards you were dealt.
It’s a “skill” for anyone that is playing the game.
Some of us have a skill level that is basic or lower.
Others have a skill level that is higher, or even expert level.
I can’t play basketball to save my life. Just because I don’t have any skills or talent does not make the sport itself any less of a skill. I just shouldn’t fucking play it. Ever. And I’d be a complete idiot to put money against Shaq or Magic in challenging them to a game of HORSE. Same concepts apply to Poker.
I think where you’re probably getting hung up on is in thinking of poker as a just game of chance or even just a game of cards. “Good cards win. Bad cards lose.” It’s WAYYYYYY more than that and if you want to boil it down to a succinct theme it’s . . . . “Make money”. Minimize losses, maximize wins. That said, if you have a streak of bad luck and get nothing but shit cards, you’re going to have a hard time winning anyway. So there is still random luck that comes into play, especially in the short hand, but again, Poker PLAYERS are seeking wins over a long run typically (whether several hours at a table or a lifetime of play).
If you got 5 Royal Flushes in a night, you get congratulated for your seemingly impossible luck. But if you didn’t make money, you just aren’t a good Poker player. You’re lucky, but still unskilled.
Pulling money outta people is the skill. I understand this aspect as well. Probably a little more clearly because of the time you and extra took to explain.
Thanks
I wonder if Psychopaths would be or are good poker players… they show no emotion and would be hard to read OR since they emulate emotions very well they could potentially make you think what ever they wanted you too… I wonder if there is a study.
I don’t know. I’ve thought the same sometimes, haha.
I think the ones that are good at manipulating people and have a high enough level of intelligence to have a good grasp of the math/probability probably would be pretty good.
It was funny because earlier I was thinking of Rain Man type autistic people, but that wouldn’t really be good for poker, I don’t think, because poker is not as “robotic” as mastering the almost binary skill of blackjack card counting and betting accordingly. In blackjack, there’s nothing to read except the cards, so . . . . . yeah, RAIN MAN can clean house. But they’re not typically the type to accurately read others and adjust accordingly to gain advantage. Anyway, they’re fun concepts to explore.
Not to sound like I’m adoring these people, but I’m pretty sure ALL these fuckers have high IQs. I think that’s one of the constants when it comes to psychopaths is that they’re all above average when it comes to smart… Which would make sense because if they’re going to survive in in a feeling society you would think they would need to learn how to play the game.
Yeah, rain man would be horrible and just the autistic spectrum in general would be horrible at poker. one of the most often recognized traits in the autism spectrum disorder is that the people that have it don’t recognize emotions in others. they don’t know or recognize or understand facial cues or changes in vocal patterns a whole smattering of non verbal clues.
I’m not saying all Autism Spectrum Disorders have this but that’s definitely the most popular well known trait associated with Autism.
You’d be surprised how freakishly empathetic some folks on the spectrum are. I’ve met a few folks who literally cannot figure a tip at a diner or who cannot fathom how to navigate given painfully precise directions but can suss out when a person is honest or lying like a psychic.
I have zero experience with poker but play competitive MtG/Pokemon/YGO/FOW from time to time and while there is an element of luck involved, it’s a game of knowledge (both of card effects and metagames), of finessing the fuck out of a person (knowing when a person is bluffing, doing things like excessive shuffling or flexing a foiled deck or mismatched cards to tilt/distract an opponent), and being an absolute devil in regards to rules. Card games are fuckin GRIMY, man. I love 'em.
You think you have your mono-R prowess opponent on the ropes, then they bolt one of their own Swiftspears, then they fucking bolt the OTHER one, and swing in for lethal, and you can’t help but be impressed at the interaction and royally pissed cuz who fucking bolts their own SPEARS, man~
I probably would. I’ve seen A lot. But I do have about 10 years in in Special Education which includes teaching these kids and going to trainings regarding these kids. I haven’t seen any that are hyper emotional. Doesn’t mean theyre not out there, though. It’s usually the opposite. They’re Hypoemotional (well regarding others - often times theyre hyperemotional themselves). Like I said before, on average, they mostly don’t understand nonverbal cues, certainly don’t understand sarcasm, some understand non verbal cues but have no concept of personal space. others have no concept of personal space or non verbal cues, others read a page once and can recite the whole page back… they have no idea what it means but they can do it… So, I wouldn’t be surprised to see some variant where they’re emotional savants like Deana Troy or some shit from Star trek tng… In my experiences most of the time they’re some variation of Spock from Star Trek but without the super smart part.
The last kid on the spectrum I had had a clothing issue, he had social issues as well that would get bad from time to time but nothing like his sweatshirt. He absolutely HAD to wear his red hooded sweatshirt ALWAYS and with the hood on. He was aware enough to know it wasn’t normal but not comfortable enough to not do it. Didn’t matter if it was 105 or 26 degrees outside hed be wearing it. Oddly enough his senior year a girl coaxed him out of it. She told him he had nice hair and poof he took that fucker off!!! go figure.
My buddy’s son is autistic too, very stunted socially, He’s is fascinated by other people crying. He’ll try to help someone feel better though, like he recognizes there’s a problem and will try to help but he’s so awkward doing it. you can kinda tell he’d really rather be studying it but my buddy and his wife kinda taught him when there are tears somebody feels bad . The sweetest kid on the planet. Always so happy. another curios point is he only eats white food… won’t eat any other color. makes him throw up or stress out to the point he scratches himself into bleeding.
What’s odd is some people “grow out of it” (for lack of a better explanation) and sometimes theres a wall where they can’t see before and after and other times they’re completely aware of the change.
fascinating stuff…
God bless you man I don’t know what any of this means!!!
I don’t know what any of this means!!!