Who's better at playing poker on average?

[Evo]

Evo, you're showing your age here. The default poker game nowadays is texas hold 'em

I'm sure it is for gamblers, but wikipedia still lists 5 card draw first as a popular game among the populace. I don't think anyone has done an offical poll of Americans, at least not to my knowledge.

Of course people watch ( I presume) those poker games on tv, so perhaps more people are playing it to be like the tv people. I don't, watching poker on tv is about as exciting as watching paint dry.

 

[Office_Shredder]

It's also the number one (by far) game on online poker sites

 

[Mu naught]

most string theorists got into it so they could boost their poker game.

 

[turbo]

Evo, you're showing your age here. The default poker game nowadays is texas hold 'em

When you're playing dealer's choice, hold 'em is definitely not the only choice. My 84 year old father plays regularly with a fellow who enters those feeder tourneys who wants to get to regional and national hold 'em events. I know that he's winning not because he tells me, but because the fellow patronizes an office-supply place that my friend manages, and he complains about how the "old guy" skinned him again at the table.

 

[Galteeth]

Ok, a few things. No, hold'em is not the only choice. But nobody plays draw. And hold'em is pretty much standard.

You guys are missing an important part of the game. Besides "tells" which in all honesty are only things that really bad players have, and the probability of making hands, there is betting patterns. For those of you who don't play, there is something for example, called slow playing. This is when you have the best hand, but you don't want others to know, so you don't bet large to rope them in. There is also bets to minimize the number of players. There are also bets that depend on stack size (money available.) If you are the chip leader, you want to bet high pre-flop to "tax" everyone else. You don't want anybody to see free cards. On the other hand, if you are short stack, you have to pick a spot and go all in, even if the odds are not that great. There is of course bluffing.
There is also recognizing the patterns of other players, and "table image." For example, let's say I have slow played a number of hands, and have won big pots doing so. Players will recognize my pattern, so in the future, I can bet in a similar manner to previous times I was slow playing, and then execute a bluff more successfully. Of course good players understand table image, so there is the expectation that others do as well, and you might be able to anticipate situations where table image is being taken advantage of. There is also pot odds, which refers to the degree of investment in the pot. For example, if there is 100 in the pot, and I only have a 1 in 5 chance of winning, but the cost to stay in the hand is only a dollar, the pot odds suggest this is a sensible bet.

As an aspect of table image it will sometimes makes sense to bet on an unlikely hand to win, because if you do win, people won't see it coming and you can often win large pots (i,e, what could he have? he wouldn't have played with anything on the table) If you get a reputation for doing this, you can then sometimes make wild bluffs.

Or in some cases it might make sense to bet when you know you are going to lose, chasing something extremely unlikely, so you can set up a later bluff or draw someone in when you have a winner.

Anyway, you guys get the idea, and the point is knowing the odds of making a hand is only a small part of the game.

Also, um, I'm no expert in probability, but it's sort of obvious that probability refers to situations where exact information is unknown. Of course in each situation only one particular combination of cards is dealt; what is relevant to the calculation is what you don't know. This is always the way probability works; what information you have and what information you don't. Saying the fact that players have cards changes the probability is like saying the order of cards in the deck changes the probability. Of course it does, IF you have the information.

What is the probability of getting heads on a fair coin flip? If I know the outcome, either 100 percent or zero. But lacking all necessary information (like all the minute details of the universe that lead up to the moment I flip the coin) the probability is 50 percent.( a little less actually cause there is a slight chance the coin can land on its side)

 

[FredericGos]

Have you ever spent any time playing poker?

Yes of course, don't be silly! I play both online and live. Online maybe a couple a times a week and live maybe 3-4 times a month.

I don't mean very limited controlled games like Texas Hold'em, but free-wheeling games that change with the whims of the dealer. And yes, the better players are subtly watching the other players and keeping an eye on them. One night a couple of "strangers" showed up separately at a game organized by a friend. After a couple of hands in which one of the "strangers" bumped and then dropped, sweetening the pot for his confederate, I offered to help the host fix some snacks for the table. I told him what was going on, and the two cheats were "invited" to leave. They left. Lots of stuff happens over the table. You don't have to put people under a magnifying glass - just be aware of the signs. Vegas pit-bosses would have arranged for those guys to be ejected and blackballed with ongoing prejudice.

ok, this is the red flag in my eyes! ;) I suppose you guys are armed to the teeth, wear stetsons, smoke cigars, drink bourbon and have cheap hookers on your lap?

You are not going to convince me of anything by bringing this old cliche to the table. This is excactly why poker has such a bad rep of a degenerate gamblers game instead of being the MIND GAME that it is. The days of rounders are over. Rounders was not even such a great movie as most of what's told in that movie is BS. It's a good entertaining movie that's all.

And by the way, I fail to see why this would be an argument in favor of physical tells. Some shady home game turns bad because you guys spot some cheaters? hmmm

When I play live, I play at the poker club. It's a quite normal place, smoke free, alcohol free and most important CASH free. All buyin stuff gets done over netbanking. Just the other day I was down there playing a 100$ (or what amounts to that) tourney. There was 89 entrants and I busted out in 23 place... Now, I busted because I lost a coin flip with 99 agaisnt AK. I pushed because I was below 20 big blinds and thought the spot was right to steal the blinds. Not because someone nostrils were trembling or someone said the wrong thing. Just normal stack size based tournament play. And that's how most play goes about there. People, while they are just there to relax engage in strategy conversions mostly revolving aroung some poker math stuff and game theoretical concepts. And yes, the games are Holdem, Omaha, Omaha Hi/lo, stud, stud hi/lo and razz. Sorry but no draw.

 

[FredericGos]

but Frederic claimed that math was all that was required, he still thinks it's the most important factor, but he was talking about online gaming.

I did not talk explicitly about online. In fact I think the internet poker math geeks kids have a even greater advantage live, and would absolutely destroy any intuition/physical tell only player.

Take a look at most of the results of major tournaments from 2010. Just the other day, The WPT festa al lago in vegas. The event was won by Randall Flowers for 800.000$. He is in his start 20 and has won over 3.5$ mil. 1.3 live and 2.2 online. He is one of those kids and I assure you he does not use physical tells or anything. Just game theory.

Another is Jake Cody. He's won a WPT and an EPT in 2010. He's from england and around 21 also.

All in all, I bet you that you would find that 7 of 10 big tourneys these day is won by some unknown inetrent wiz kid. Pimple faced and all. No physical tells there.

Look at the final table of the WSOP main event which is going to be played here in november. 7 of the 9 are young pimplefaced kids. One of them still has his diapers on.

The list goes on and on.

 

[Galteeth]

I did not talk explicitly about online. In fact I think the internet poker math geeks kids have a even greater advantage live, and would absolutely destroy any intuition/physical tell only player.

Take a look at most of the results of major tournaments from 2010. Just the other day, The WPT festa al lago in vegas. The event was won by Randall Flowers for 800.000$. He is in his start 20 and has won over 3.5$ mil. 1.3 live and 2.2 online. He is one of those kids and I assure you he does not use physical tells or anything. Just game theory.

Another is Jake Cody. He's won a WPT and an EPT in 2010. He's from england and around 21 also.

All in all, I bet you that you would find that 7 of 10 big tourneys these day is won by some unknown inetrent wiz kid. Pimple faced and all. No physical tells there.

Look at the final table of the WSOP main event which is going to be played here in november. 7 of the 9 are young pimplefaced kids. One of them still has his diapers on.

The list goes on and on.

Because the same pattern rules apply online, tells are not a big thing for serious players.

 

[FredericGos]

Because the same pattern rules apply online, tells are not a big thing for serious players.

Exactly.

 

[Galteeth]

Also, math does help even in draw. You know the relative strength of your starting hand (top or bottom) You know the odds of your hand improving or declining based on what you choose to draw. You know the strength of your final hand (top or bottom minus the hands that include cards you've already seen)

And pot odds also come into play.

 

[Anonymous217]

Ok, a few things. No, hold'em is not the only choice. But nobody plays draw. And hold'em is pretty much standard.

...

What is the probability of getting heads on a fair coin flip? If I know the outcome, either 100 percent or zero. But lacking all necessary information (like all the minute details of the universe that lead up to the moment I flip the coin) the probability is 50 percent.( a little less actually cause there is a slight chance the coin can land on its side)

This is probably the best post in this topic (I'm obviously not going to quote the entire thing since it's lengthy). It sums up many different ways in which betting strategies and etc. based on math come into play. And yes when people talk about poker, it's mostly assumed that one's talking about texas hold'em, not because it's the only poker game, but because it's the most popular. Of course in a game like 5 card draw math/probability would have little to no importance, but that's also a reason why it's rarely played in big tournaments.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Lots of short term and results oriented thinking from the non pokers players itt. I love the image that it's still people with big hats and cigars drinking burbon from a dirty glass, raising somoeone their house on a bluff.



The switch from online to live, is really easy (was for me anyway). I play HE, omaha and O8. Not only do you have a huge arsenal of a very mathematical game, but the average live player at lower stakes truly is dreadful.

I'm trying my hand at stud, but games are rare and I have trouble remembering what's dead. So it's a memory building excercise for me.

Sorry Evo, but you are wrong again. As I wrote earlier, this is a minor thing in poker today. The whole physical tell thing is highly overrated and is quite simple to overcome.

I always scratch my *** and pull a funny face when I get pocket jacks. Could this be a tell?

 

[Evo]

The Op didn't say it was professional poker, or which game, so discussing 5 card draw is fine.

5 card draw requires a skill set that someone into math probably might not have, for example the ability to "read" someone, psychological skills are the most important part of this game. This makes it exciting, and I can see why gamers wouldn't feel comfortable with it, not enough information to fall back on.

This is the reason I prefer 5 card draw, it is a game of psychological skills, I'm very, very good at reading people. So enough of the immature "oh, no one plays that in casinos or online" so you're wrong!. It's a game that millions play so is applicable to this thread. I thought some people here had more maturity.

http://www.answerbag.com/video/Five...87734-ff88-cb00-310e-7367cc130b36/skill-games

 

[JaredJames]

I think Evo is very much right.

Of course reading people in big games is important. But the things you would be looking for are a lot more subtle and dificult to spot. Which is why you need to be good at it.

Do you think big time players wear the ridiculous sunglasses just to look cool? Of course not. Eyes can be one of the biggest give aways.

 

[turbo]

The Op didn't say it was professional poker, or which game, so discussing 5 card draw is fine.

5 card draw requires a skill set that someone into math probably might not have, for example the ability to "read" someone, psychological skills are the most important part of this game. This makes it exciting, and I can see why gamers wouldn't feel comfortable with it, not enough information to fall back on.

This is the reason I prefer 5 card draw, it is a game of psychological skills, I'm very, very good at reading people. So enough of the immature "oh, no one plays that in casinos or online" so you're wrong!. It's a game that millions play so is applicable to this thread. I thought some people here had more maturity.

http://www.answerbag.com/video/Five...87734-ff88-cb00-310e-7367cc130b36/skill-games

There are all kinds of poker games, including regional favorites. My paper machine crew didn't turn away players, and when other people wanted to join our games, we did our best to accommodate them. The best way to do this (with more than 7 players) was to revert to games with shared common cards so there would be enough cards for everyone to play. Texas hold 'em is a variation on this type of game, but it certainly isn't the end-all. It is a simple game. It has become popular on TV, though I don't see why. I find it deadly dull.

 

[Anonymous217]

This is the reason I prefer 5 card draw, it is a game of psychological skills, I'm very, very good at reading people. So enough of the immature "oh, no one plays that in casinos or online" so you're wrong!. It's a game that millions play so is applicable to this thread. I thought some people here had more maturity.

This is the reason why it's rarely played in casinos, online, or professionally very often. Because it has little to no math involved, there is little separation from a professional to an amateur other than being able to read people and concealing your tells, all of which makes a negligible difference at a tournament since almost all professionals are able to conceal their tells and constantly switch up their playing style. Of course this would be different in a game with some friends as you would (or should at least) be able to read your friends better than you can read a stranger.

 

[Evo]

This is the reason why it's rarely played in casinos, online, or professionally very often. Because it has little to no math involved, there is little separation from a professional to an amateur other than being able to read people and concealing your tells, all of which makes a negligible difference at a tournament since almost all professionals are able to conceal their tells and constantly switch up their playing style. Of course this would be different in a game with some friends as you would (or should at least) be able to read your friends better than you can read a stranger.

Yes, I figured that was why people didn't like playing it competitively. Games purely of intuition and psychology don't work in casino environments.

 

[kramer733]

Hey guys. Thanks for answering my question. Though it did kinda trail off a bit. First of all, i'd like to address that when I was saying "poker", i meant texas hold'em. I should've stated that sooner and I am sorry for the confusion.

Secondly, I'm kinda interested in poker but i also want to do a math degree. I'm not sure if i want to do a pure math or statistics/probablity degree. If i choose the pure math degree option, will i be able to pick up game theory and probabliity as well?

 

[xxChrisxx]

You don't need a degree to do poker 'maths'. Becuase you hardly ever calcualte anything at the table. Anything you are going to calcualte is simple and done away from the table.

It's all about memorising odds of a certain number of outs coming out and certain typical situations. Then evaluating your equity vs a range of villains hands at the table and betting accordingly.

Yes, I figured that was why people didn't like playing it competitively. Games purely of intuition and psychology don't work in casino environments.

That and 5card draw is a boring game (for those who enjoy a game with strategy - I play when I want to GAMBOOOL), just like 5 card stud (which is why that is very rarely played except in home games where they emulate movie poker). If you are going to find draw or mixed games in a casino it will be 2-7 triple draw. Still a 'reading' game, but at least has some skill involved.

 

[Anonymous217]

The typical math you need is simple probability and algebra, all of which can be done by anyone who has completed high school algebra. This is why math majors have no clear advantage over anyone else. It's math anyone can do as long one commits himself to it. Game theory and etc. makes little use in an actual game of Texas Hold'em. It's only used in developing your own distinct methods and validating stuff you should already know by common sense. If you're going for a math degree, do it based not on which is more useful in poker, but which one you enjoy more or excel at. There's almost no difference, which has been stated in the topic several times now I believe.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Game theory and etc. makes little use in an actual game of Texas Hold'em.

Game theory can be used to determine an optimum bluffing frequency vs a known opponent to minimize his EV. Of course at the table you don't sit crunching numbers to do this, it's played by feel to pick your spots, but away from the table you can work out how often you should be bluffing.

 

[Anonymous217]

But how often would you be able to "work it out" when the opponent isn't known, which would usually be the case?

 

[mugaliens]

Game theory can be used to determine an optimum bluffing frequency...

Exactly, and this is precisely why physicists have made some serious (millions of dollars) in this game. Probability is everything in poker, but about the other players, not just the cards.

 

[turbo]

Exactly, and this is precisely why physicists have made some serious (millions of dollars) in this game. Probability is everything in poker, but about the other players, not just the cards.

Do you have any reliable information to support that statement? Which three top winners in Texas hold-em are physicists? Any?

 

[ka0z]

I think Evo is very much right.

Of course reading people in big games is important. But the things you would be looking for are a lot more subtle and dificult to spot. Which is why you need to be good at it.

Do you think big time players wear the ridiculous sunglasses just to look cool? Of course not. Eyes can be one of the biggest give aways.

And why do the biggest time players not wear sunglasses?

It's pretty obvious that the discussion being held in this topic are between people that actually know about "Hold'em" and those that are thinking about a completely different game (ie jared thinking about card counting.., evo thinking about 5-card draw), and probably do not even know how Hold'em is actually played.

 

[xxChrisxx]

But how often would you be able to "work it out" when the opponent isn't known, which would usually be the case?

You can either start with the assumption that the player plays good 'textbook' poker. Or you can assume that the player is dreadful. At low stakes I assume everyone is bad because a good player is easy to spot quickly.

As you play you then learn how competent that player is, you try to build a mental picture replacing the default with player specific information.

You only really need specific information on regulars, as they arw the successful players who are harder to beat. Fish are poor and are pretty easy to beat. I keep notes on and hand information and my general thoughts on regs. There are some I just won't play unless I'm looking to challenge myself because I know that they are better than me.

Do you have any reliable information to support that statement? Which three top winners in Texas hold-em are physicists? Any?

This is a slightly unfair response to his post. Poker isn't athletics, you can't really make a judgement on who 'the three top winners are'. How do you measure this? Cash game wins? Tournament wins in cash amount? Tournament cashes? WSOP bracelets won? You can be successful to the tune of millions without being recognised by the wider public (meaning no data on you)

On saying that I don't subscribe to the view that being a physicist/mathematician will help you any. Many physicisa are successful poker players. This is bacuse they are good poker players who just happen to be physicists.

 

[Galteeth]

And why do the biggest time players not wear sunglasses?

It's pretty obvious that the discussion being held in this topic are between people that actually know about "Hold'em" and those that are thinking about a completely different game (ie jared thinking about card counting.., evo thinking about 5-card draw), and probably do not even know how Hold'em is actually played.

There are elements of reading people but it doesn't really involve "tells." For example, if I'm slow playing, and someone bets, I'll hesitate awhile before calling. I'm hoping he'll read this hesitation as deliberation on my part so that he'll keep betting and get pot committed.

As far as the guys you see on tv who wear sunglasses, it could be because they know they're bad with eyes, but I think it's just as likely to be fashion.

Sometimes, I go "yes!" when I get dealt a really good hand, so I guess that's a tell. But I also do it sometimes when I get bad hands...

 

[JaredJames]

And why do the biggest time players not wear sunglasses?

None of those players wear glasses? That's a big claim I'm sure you're able to back up?

As per another post. You don't have to wear glasses and it's only if your eyes are a giveaway during your game. So no, not everyone has to.

It's pretty obvious that the discussion being held in this topic are between people that actually know about "Hold'em" and those that are thinking about a completely different game (ie jared thinking about card counting.., evo thinking about 5-card draw), and probably do not even know how Hold'em is actually played.

Covered much, much further back. Please read the older posts before you come out with this rubbish.

I do know how hold'em is played. Not my favourite game though.

I recommend you look back a few posts and realize that Hold'em wasn't specified until then. So five card draw was just as applicable.

 

[xxChrisxx]

None of those players wear glasses? That's a big claim I'm sure you're able to back up?

As per another post. You don't have to wear glasses and it's only if your eyes are a giveaway during your game. So no, not everyone has to.

Covered much, much further back. Please read the older posts before you come out with this rubbish.

I do know how hold'em is played. Not my favourite game though.

I recommend you look back a few posts and realize that Hold'em wasn't specified until then. So five card draw was just as applicable.

I don't wish to bash you or anything but being vaguely aware of the rules and actually properly knowing them are two different things. The case in point is that you were unaware that the cards were shuffled after every hand. In all forms of poker the cards are shuffled.

Poker is not 3 card brag.

 

[JaredJames]

I don't wish to bash you or anything but being vaguely aware of the rules and actually properly knowing them are two different things. The case in point is that you were unaware that the cards were shuffled after every hand. In all forms of poker the cards are shuffled.

An issue that was commented on and corrected on the first page. Have I made similar comments since? No. Do you disagree with my other posts? If so, why not post regarding the issue you have and explain why I am incorrect.

Probability debate aside, I have made one mistake. I accepted it and dealt with it. Does that have any effect on my other posts here? If you think so and have an issue just ignore me or as above, tell me why I'm wrong. But don't come here and imply I'm wrong because of that one issue.

So far, I've only seen two people in this thread I'd consider to have a sound knowledge of the game. Perhaps we should remove everyone else and just leave them discuss it?

 

[ka0z]

An issue that was commented on and corrected on the first page. Have I made similar comments since? No. Do you disagree with my other posts? If so, why not post regarding the issue you have and explain why I am incorrect.

Probability debate aside, I have made one mistake. I accepted it and dealt with it. Does that have any effect on my other posts here? If you think so and have an issue just ignore me or as above, tell me why I'm wrong. But don't come here and imply I'm wrong because of that one issue.

So far, I've only seen two people in this thread I'd consider to have a sound knowledge of the game.

It does affect the credibility of your knowledge for the game. If poker doesn't translate to Hold'em to you, then you're clearly out of touch with the current state of the game played.

And on the subject on sunglasses, Just take a look at most players on High Stake Poker, Poker After Dark, ie Phil Ivey, Tom Dwann, Daniel Negreanu, Peter Eastgate etcetc. If sunglasses were to give you a huge edge, then you would expect everyone to wear them, but they don't. It's just a matter of preference and habit to wear what they're comfortable with.

 

[JaredJames]

It does affect the credibility of your knowledge for the game. If poker doesn't translate to Hold'em to you, then you're clearly out of touch with the current state of the game played.

Where did I say Hold'em isn't poker or the like?

So would I be right in assuming you disagree with every other post I've made? If that's the case, perhaps you could point out exactly where I'm wrong and help me learn.

And on the subject on sunglasses, Just take a look at most players on High Stake Poker, Poker After Dark, ie Phil Ivey, Tom Dwann, Daniel Negreanu, Peter Eastgate etcetc. If sunglasses were to give you a huge edge, then you would expect everyone to wear them, but they don't. It's just a matter of preference and habit to wear what they're comfortable with.

I never said they gave you a "huge edge", just that eyes can be a big giveaway and people wear them to prevent this. Don't know where you're getting me claiming they give everyone a huge edge?

 

[Anonymous217]

Some people just wear sunglasses as a bit of insurance. That is, why WOULDN'T you wear sunglasses if you're comfortable playing with them? It's not saying that the players have clear cut tells without sunglasses, but their reasoning is that they might as well put them on just in case. Take Chris Ferguson for example. He clearly doesn't need sunglasses and yet he wears them simply as a preference.Also with sunglasses, you can look at things without having other players know you're looking there. You can be facing downwards towards the cards for example, but actually be glancing at your opponent to watch his expressions. It really makes little to no difference though.

And they're right. Jarednjames, although you only made one "mistake" in this topic, it makes one curious on to how much you really know about the game, which resulted in the criticism of your post where you claimed that you do know how to play Hold'em.

 

[Evo]

Some people just wear sunglasses as a bit of insurance. That is, why WOULDN'T you wear sunglasses if you're comfortable playing with them? It's not saying that the players have clear cut tells without sunglasses, but their reasoning is that they might as well put them on just in case. Take Chris Ferguson for example. He clearly doesn't need sunglasses and yet he wears them simply as a preference.Also with sunglasses, you can look at things without having other players know you're looking there. You can be facing downwards towards the cards for example, but actually be glancing at your opponent to watch his expressions. It really makes little to no difference though.

And they're right. Jarednjames, although you only made one "mistake" in this topic, it makes one curious on to how much you really know about the game, which resulted in the criticism of your post where you claimed that you do know how to play Hold'em.

Actually, the pupils can dilate or contract depending on emotions. My company put me through a few courses on how to "read people" because I was in technical sales dealing with multimillion dollar contracts. The pupils were a big one to watch, as were subtle voice changes, posture, fingers, feet, tilt of head, repeated movements. How to detect slight changes in the voice. Persiration, breathing, facial coloring. Quite interesting. These skills of observation can be used quite effectively in poker.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Actually, the pupils can dilate or contract depending on emotions. My company put me through a few courses on how to "read people" because I was in technical sales dealing with multimillion dollar contracts. The pupils were a big one to watch, as were subtle voice changes, posture, fingers, feet, tilt of head, repeated movements. How to detect slight changes in the voice. Persiration, breathing, facial coloring. Quite interesting. These skills of observation can be used quite effectively in poker.

I think were all getting too hung up on the eyes and sunglasses to be honest.

There is no doubt they are a factor in live games. The point is its not the be all and end all.

The beauty of poker is that at face value its a very simple game, yet can have an unrivalled depth.