The worry, then, is that conclusively classifying poker as a game of skill might open the floodgates for commercial operators. Not a problem in itself, but definitely an issue when it comes to. Both skill and luck matter in poker, but you can still decide when and how much to rely on either. Use your poker skill to decide when to try your luck, advises Carlos @HipHop101Trivia Welch. The determination of whether Texas Hold’em is primarily a game of luck or skill has recently become the subject of intense legal debate. Complicating things is the fact that the terms luck and skill are extremely difficult to define. Texas Holdem – Luck vs Skill There are games where any good moves you make give you an immediate reward towards winning the game. In a chess match you can compare your move with all other possible moves and you will know if you were right or wrong making that move.

We all know that both skill and luck affect how well we do as poker players. But many people seem to misunderstand the idea that your skill determines how much luck you need to rely upon. If you are skillful enough to understand how your opponents play, you can often wait for them to make their favorite mistakes and thus reduce the effect that luck has on your results.

Many of us make slightly positive-EV but unnecessary shoves against opponents who play 'face-up,' and then blame bad luck when we lose. What we should be doing instead is figuring out how they play so that we can take less risky and more profitable lines against them.

One example of this kind of adjustment is not three-bet shoving 25 big blinds with a hand like K-Q-suited over an open against a guy who makes calling mistakes with an A-x heavy range. Instead against such an opponent we should be three-betting smaller and then taking it down with a flop continuation bet whenever he misses (if you know, that is, that he is unlikely to four-bet light preflop or play too sticky postflop).

Both plays are +EV, but one relies more on luck than the other. If you know how your opponent plays, then you can avoid some slightly +EV all-in gambles and instead depend on skill to generate even larger edges.

So a question arises: When can we rely on skill to generate these large edges, and when must we instead rely on luck?

Here are a few considerations that have served me well when answering that question in the small stakes tournaments I play.

Quality and Quantity of Players in the Pot

If you are in a heads-up pot with an equally skilled player, then obviously you have to rely on luck since neither player has much of an edge. No one wants to give an inch in these confrontations, so sometimes they result in big, high variance pots. The best you can do is play as close as you can to game theoretically optimal (GTO) poker and let the cards fall where they may.

This situation can lead to some unreasonable tilt — for instance, when you correctly bluff off a big stack into a fellow reg who then correctly makes a sigh-call with the top of his range. If both players are equally skilled, then this sort of GTO trainwreck is an unavoidable part of poker. It should no more tilt you than losing in a fair coin-flipping game. In fact, you should treat it like the people do who play the lottery and lose with a smile. At the end of the day, gambling is gambling, but at least you had a much better shot at winning than they did.

The same cannot be said for a heads-up pot against a player against whom you have a massive edge. This is not the time to gamble and rely on luck. If he is the type to make big calling mistakes, for example, then obviously you should not make big GTO bluffs against him. Instead, delay putting the chips in until you have a value hand just above what you believe he will call.

In multi-way pots, I tend to rely more on luck for a few reasons. First, most of us are not skilled in these sort of pots. The additional players make the game tree so complex that even our GTO solvers cannot handle it, so don't assume your relatively feeble human brain knows what the best play is in every situation. That's the bad news.

The good news is that these pots often contain many bad players who called with hands that cannot stand a lot of heat. I take advantage of this by making big squeeze plays and if I have to get it in, at least the dead money will subsidize my gamble and often turn a dicey situation into a profitable one.

Texas Holdem Poker Luck Or Skill Skills

Field Size and Payout Structure

Tournaments with big guarantees and small buy-ins result in big fields. The prizes are usually top heavy and it takes a lot of luck to reach the final table almost regardless of the field's average skill level.

If you are too cautious in these games, eventually you will find yourself shorter-stacked than most players around you and pressured to make a move because of the escalating blinds. Sooner or later, you'll have to gamble and go all in.

For that reason, it's nice to have a big stack so that you can survive one or two of these confrontations. I play a little faster and welcome slightly +EV gambles early in these tournaments, because I'd rather double or bust trying to get a big stack than grind a short stack for hours hoping to get a min-cash that usually isn't much more than the buy-in I invested.

On the other hand, tournaments with small guarantees and big buy-ins attract small fields. This results in lower variance and allows you to be a little more patient. I try to pick my spots carefully in smaller-field tournaments, because oftentimes I can cash with a median stack and still have enough chips to make a final table run once we get into the money.

Far From, Close To, and On the Bubble Play

Far from the bubble, I rely more heavily on either skill or luck depending on the factors above. As I get closer to the bubble, say for example, the point where half the remaining players get paid, I start to make some adjustments.

When I have a short stack, this is the time I welcome variance and gamble for a stack that can cash. With a medium stack, I gamble for a stack that can become a big stack while trying to save a few chips to cash with in case things do not work out. With a big stack, I settle down in anticipation of the bubble play when around 80% of the remaining players get paid. This is sort of the calm before the storm because at that point, I plan to apply tons of ICM pressure on my handcuffed opponents.

If instead I am a medium stack on the bubble and the big stacks are playing well, I am more or less forced to fold into the money. As passive as this sounds, it is really just a skillful execution of correct ICM play and I benefit from having opponents who do not understand it. With a short stack, I may need to continue gambling and relying on luck to take me over the threshold.

Conclusion

It is true that both skill and luck are huge parts of poker, but they lie on a continuum and you get to decide which of the two is more important to depend on at any given moment.

The problem is that most of us learned poker from the perspective of making correct plays with our cards instead of attacking incorrect plays our opponents make with theirs. This is a defensive position that forces us to rely on luck more often than is necessary.

It's not until after you have developed these fundamentals that you begin to think offensively and deviate from them in order to attack your opponents who do not use them to protect themselves.

• Tags

  tournament strategyno-limit hold'emskill-vs.-luckexpected valuebubble strategyICMGTOpreflop strategypostflop strategyequity

One of the age old questions that lingers around poker is whether it is a game predominately of skill or luck. There is no denying that both skill and luck play significant parts of the game, but which is the dominant factor? This article will delve into the inner workings of Texas Holdem, compare the game to other variants such as Chess, and also compile quotes and insights from some of the world’s top poker players. DurrrrChallenge.com has been surprised at how divergent point of views are on this subject. From our experience, Texas Hold’em is clearly a mixture of both in the short term, and results are heavily weighted towards skill in the long term.

• Does Not Accept US Players
• Fast Cashouts
• $88 Free Bonus
• Established: 1997

The Insiders Comment

If you ask those deeply involved in poker, its top players and authors, they will argue that skill is by far the strongest factor.

Respected poker author David Sklansky has stated that good poker players “are at war with luck. They use their skills to minimize luck as much as possible.”

11-time WSOP bracelet winner Phil Hellmuth has infamously stated “If it weren’t for luck, I’d win every time.”

Poker Players Alliance Chairman Alfonse D’Amato and former New York Senator commented, “As a poker player, I can tell you that knowing when to hold or fold is not based solely on the cards that are dealt, but a series of decisions based on skill and the actions taken by other players. This study provides the raw data to back up the compelling arguments made by poker players around the world that it’s skill, not pure luck, that determines the outcome of this game.”

Scott Matusow, poker commentator and brother of Mike “The Mouth” Mouth Matusow, asserts that your perspective and approach to your game determines if poker is predominately a game of skill or luck. If you approach the game as a vocation that you apply yourself at, studying, disciplined and structured playing and observing strict bankroll management, you are bound to see that skill wins out in the end. If you are the casual player who likes the action, taking risks, gets emotional with wins and losses and rarely follows the recommended percentages or bankroll management, they are likely to view poker as based mostly on luck. In the end, the player perceptions aren’t the determining factor of whether poker is a skill game or not. The skill level of a player doesn’t determine whether the game is a game of skill or not. It only helps to determine their relative results in that game of skill.

You Can’t Avoid Losing No Matter How Skillful You Are

No one will debate that there isn’t considerable luck involved in poker, especially in the short term. No one controls what cards will be dealt. No player can win every hand. No player is always dealt a good hand or knows when their good hand will face a better hand. All you can do is play the percentages. The skilled player attempts to take advantage of luck when it visits them and how to minimize the effects when it visits their opponents.

Some poker players love to point at a string of unfortunate bad beats as signs that poker is mostly luck. The reality is you’ll suffer more bad beats if you’re playing well, because by definition a good player will be getting their money in the pot with the percentages in their favor. They are most likely ahead, thus more likely to get outdrawn more times than a poorly skilled player who won’t be ahead as often and thus can’t suffer as many bad beats.

A big distinction between poker and pure gambling games is when gambling you are playing against “the house.” The Casino has statistical edges to all their games which means in the long term you are destined to lose. In poker, the house has no interest in the outcome, as they are an impartial provider of the services for a fee. They provide a forum for the players to compete equally against each other. One player will win at the expense of others. The rules of real money poker accord every player a statistically equal chance to win, unlike gambling.

David Sklansky’s favorite argument for skill being predominant in poker is to look at gambling games and losing. In pure gambling games of chance, like baccarat or roulette, it is impossible to intentionally lose. Each move has a similar chance. That is not the case in poker. Poker players contribute significantly towards their results by the actions they choose to make. If poker relied mainly on luck, most players would play to showdown and turn over their cards on the river to let luck decide the winner. There are some who argue that there is no actual luck in poker, as luck is random and doesn’t favor anyone long term so it’s a non factor, there are just mathematical fluctuations that in the long run approximate the correct probabilities for your play.

Studies

A Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society study demonstrated clearly that participants who were given instructions and basic strategy advice outperformed those who were not instructed. It showed that players who selected their starting hands more carefully also fared better. Finally, the control group who received no prior instruction saw their results improve as time went on, showing that there was a learning by experience factor.

A Levitt and Miles study using date from 32,000 players who participated in the 57 2010 WSOP tournaments demonstrated that “previously classified ‘skilled’ players outperformed “unskilled” players by a large margin.” The “skilled” players achieved an average return on investment of over 30% while all others gain a negative 15% return on their results. Comparisons were made to skill and luck based accepted endeavours like stock investing.

In a 2009 Cigital study of 103 million hands of Hold’em played on PokerStars, it was shown that 75% of hands dealt never made it to showdown. Therefore the success of a hand depended more on players betting than on the cards they were dealt. The player with the best final hand rarely won the hand. Paco Hope, one of the studies’ authors stated “the same information is available to all players (the values of the cards), but it is skill in interpreting that information — not the presence of that information — that determines whether a player folds.”

The important caveat to all studies on the role of skill in poker is the length of time that you measure the results. In the short term, luck can overcome any skill you display, but over enough time, skill will always overwhelm luck in poker.

Poker vs. Chess or Financial Markets

Comparisons are made to chess or to the financial markets when comparing the skill element of poker. Poker is a game of incomplete information, whereas chess isn’t. In chess, it’s possible an unskilled player could get lucky for a move or two, but over the entire game, they can’t compete with a master player. Given enough time, the same would happen in poker. A true amateur would stand no chance long term against a top professional poker player.

As for the financial markets, there are numerous parallels with poker. Brokers look for edges to exploit, but the unpredictability of the markets can easily undermine prudent decisions. It’s said “the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent” so even high percentage plays can fail. In the long run, the amateur is going to make too many low percentage plays and go broke.

Texas Holdem Poker Luck Or Skill Guide

Why Poker Is Popular

Texas Holdem Poker Luck Or Skill Game

Much of the popularity of poker is due to the wonderful combination of luck and skill. If it were solely a game of skill, the inexperienced wouldn’t play because they would lose every time. If it were too much about luck, the professional players would give up. With the current balance of luck and skill in poker, on any given day anyone can win a tournament, but over time the skillful players will come out on top. Over time luck evens out and the skill difference will prevail. It is the psychological ramifications of how we deal with the skill and luck components that can prove challenging for many players.

Texas Holdem Poker Luck Or Skill Cheat

Poker constantly puts you to decisions (e.g. bet or check, raise or fold) that require skill to navigate effectively. Each of your decisions impact your ability to win a hand or session. The fact that there are many levels of success in the game only goes to prove that their different skill levels influence their results long term.