Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Tonawanda, post: 1455120, member: 63588"]
[b]Study Flawed[/b]

[U]No argument[/U] about the value of skill and betting in the long haul.

But, next to impossible to give luck/skill a % value using math.

I have to really question the methodology and conclusion (not the math, formulas or information provided) of this study.

It's obvious to all here that there is a lot more to poker than who had the best hand, especially when you don't get to see the cards.

The fact that you ended up having the best 5 card hand and didn't win a hand is meaningless.You have to make a decision before you even see a flop. Because you would have drawn a straight, and won with a 2-7 starting hand isn't indicative of anything. The study seems to imply that somehow players with the best finishing hand should win a larger % of hands.

To evaluate the game properly, I believe you need to break up the hands into separate parts. Let's do a preflop study first. A game in itself without a card being turned over. Bets, re-raises, check-raising stealing blinds etc. Those 2 cards you are dealt are a huge indicator of how long you will be in the hand. After the flop, more and more of the same.

This reasoning for the conclusion on his part alone taints the results of the study.

Having said that, just based on observation and experience, it would seem to me that skill, heart, knowledge and experience in this game heavily favor the better players over a period of time.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us