US States
NJ Online Casinos
WV Online Casinos
PA Online Casinos
Michigan Online Casinos
Online Casino California
Online Casino Arizona
Online Casino NY
Real Money Casinos
Fastest Payout Casinos
Mobile Casino Apps
New Online Casinos
Casino Payment Methods
Sweepstakes
Sweepstakes apps
No deposit bonus
Daily login bonus
Sweepstakes games
Crown Coins
Funrize
Hello Millions
High 5 Casino
Jackpota Casino
Mcluck
MegaBonanza
PlayFame
Pulsz
RealPrize
Stake.us
Sweepstakes coins
Awards
Search forums
Free Games
Free Blackjack
Free Online Roulette
Free Slots
Bonuses
No Deposit Bonus
Crown Coins Promo Code
Funrize Primo Code
Hello Millions Promo Code
High 5 Casino Promo Code
Jackpota Promo Code
McLuck Promo Code
MegaBonanza Promo Code
Pulsz Promo Code
RealPrize Promo Code
Stake.us Promo Code
Games
Online Slots
Blackjack
Roulette
Poker
CardsChat Freerolls
How to Play Poker
Poker Hands
Poker Strategy
Free Online Poker Game
Poker Bonuses
Poker Tools
Poker Podcast
Poker School
Forum
News
Log in
Join
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Install the app
Install
Forum
Poker Discussion
General Poker
Are there enough really variables for a 'Poker Edge'
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="PurgatoryD, post: 2128772, member: 43498"] I think you pose a great question and I look forward to reading the responses you get. I haven't played poker long enough to know the answer myself. My suspicion is this: even though a good player can beat a grandmaster in a single tournament, given 1000 tournaments, the good player will never be able to beat the grandmaster most of the time. Never. If that's not the case, then poker doesn't allow for the mastery edge you describe. But what percentage can the good player expect to win? 200 games? 400? I really have no idea. I'd love to hear what others think on that one. Poker is difficult to compare with chess since a good chess player can never beat a grandmaster in a single tournament. It just can't happen. That's because in chess, there is no luck. In poker, however, we all know that a 90% favorite still loses 10% of the time. And variance can pump that loss percentage even higher in the short term. That's what I find fascinating about tournament play. Even if I'm an 80% favorite at every all-in showdown, I can only go there so many times before I'm out of the tournament. The survival factor is more complex than just playing the odds every single time. Good topic! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Poker Discussion
General Poker
Are there enough really variables for a 'Poker Edge'
Top