Who's better at playing poker on average?

[JaredJames]

Cheater.

Nope, that would be me and my five aces!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Math can't tell if the person across from you has a pair of Jacks one a club and one a heart, the other 3 cards are clubs. He decides to discard one of the Jacks hoping to get another club and end up with a flush. Or maybe he holds onto the Jacks and discards the three clubs, he might get 3 of a kind, 4 of a kind, or a full house. Maybe he ends up with nothing. Maybe he just holds onto the pair and does nothing. You're going to tell me that math can predict what the opponent is going to do as well? Multiply that by the number of players.

That is draw poker. The current most popular form of poker is Texas Hold'em where there is no discard and draw and you have visible "community cards". Most forms of poker, that I know of, involve visible cards and do not have any discard. Just going by my own experience with "serious" card players any game involving discards (and especially wild cards) is considered a kid/sissy/sucker game for the simple fact that strategy goes completely out the window.

Exactly, the key is psychology. Bluffing your opponents and if you're really good leading them to believe you are going to do something your not (fake a tell that they'll recognise and use it to your advantage).

From what I've seen on the TV games, the majority of betting occurs during the first deal. Where there are no community cards on the table. Most fold, two or three will stay in and bet. Eventually, assuming no one goes all in, then they go for the community cards and bet on them.
A good player will have a rough idea about the strength of the other players cards based on how they bet initially, although as I said above, a good poker player will use this to his advantage and 'bluff' it.

As I already noted you can not bluff well without the numbers to back you up. You mention games you see on TV (note that they show only the "good" or "exciting" hands on TV) and how the betting usually weddles the players down to just a few before the flop. There is math involved here as well. For instance a pair of twos is not a very good hand. If you are the first of nine to bet you may well fold them because if you pay attention to the numbers you are much less likely to win with those cards against eight potential opponents. But if everyone else has folded and there are only two other players in the hand still you are much more likely to play them since you only have two other hands to worry about. Basically, if you watch what's going on, you'll see that most any player that is first up with 6-8 other players at the table will not bet unless they have a fairly big hand and if first up does bet most anyone else in the way will fold unless they have something impressive.

 

[Evo]

The OP didn't state which game or confine it to a casino, and I do believe that 5 card draw is probably the most widely played game over all. The games where you can see part of a player's hand makes it much easier, IMO.

 

[D H]

This is a funny thread. But alas, it's a pretty good example of why most people think that poker is gambling.

All of you stating that math doesn't help in poker are so wrong.

You are creating a straw man because nobody has said that.

In each situation, you can calculate the EXACT probability of 'making your hand' (whatever hand that is).

No, you can't, for the simple reason that you do not know which cards have been face down to the other players. Suppose you are dealt a pair of aces. If two other players were each dealt an ace, your probability of improving your pair with another ace or two is exactly zero -- and that is hidden information that hopefully you cannot know. (Hopefully because there have been online scams where the hidden information has been made available to some select players.)

The best you can do is to come up with a best guess regarding the odds of improving your hand. If you can read people regarding what they have hidden in their hole cards you have vastly increased the likelihood that you will win at poker. If you can't read people your odds of being a winner go way down.

You can also calculate the probability of your opponent making a better hand.

No, you can't, assuming you do not know what their hole cards are.

Suppose you have a pair of aces in the hole and you bet first. A few people stay into see the flop (a deuce), only one other stays to see the turn (also a deuce). You have two pair, guaranteed. After you check or bet, the other person goes all in. Are you going to call because the odds of him beating your two pair is small?

What if you noticed him getting a bit fidgety after the flop, and then after the second deuce showed up you noticed that his face changed to some weird shade of red, his eyebrows start twitching, his hands got all shaky, and he immediately started counting his chips? What if you know from experience that is one of those mathematically skilled but socially inept players who never bluffs? Are you still going to call, or you going just walk away because he has advertised to anyone with skills that he has a pair of deuces in the hole?

A top-notch poker is mathematically skilled, socially aware, and occasionally bets on absolute garbage.

 

[Evo]

A top-notch poker is mathematically skilled, socially aware, and occasionally bets on absolute garbage.

Best post in the entire thread.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

If you play by the numbers without psychology, you will not do well. The reason is that what counts is not the number of hands you win, it's the amount of money you win. Part of the game is when you have a good hand and you know it, you don't show it. That way you rope the other players into betting more money than they otherwise would do.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

The OP didn't state which game or confine it to a casino, and I do believe that 5 card draw is probably the most widely played game over all. The games where you can see part of a player's hand makes it much easier, IMO.

I'm not sure on that any more. Just about anywhere you go you will find hold'em even in the video bar games along with mahjong and tictactoe. Regardless, the point really is that there is strategy to poker. It may be more or less complex or reliable depending on what version you are playing but it exists.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

If you play by the numbers without psychology, you will not do well. The reason is that what counts is not the number of hands you win, it's the amount of money you win. Part of the game is when you have a good hand and you know it, you don't show it. That way you rope the other players into betting more money than they otherwise would do.

Theoretically if you play strictly by the numbers you will almost always come out ahead. The problem apparently is that the win is not very large or dramatic and good players will know how to use it against you.

 

[Evo]

I'm not sure on that any more. Just about anywhere you go you will find hold'em even in the video bar games along with mahjong and tictactoe. Regardless, the point really is that there is strategy to poker. It may be more or less complex or reliable depending on what version you are playing but it exists.

I definitely agree.

 

[D H]

Theoretically if you play strictly by the numbers you will almost always come out ahead.

Only if you are playing with a bunch of potzers. If you and all of your opponents are equally skilled mathematically and only play per the mathematical odds, you will almost always come out slightly behind (there is the vig to pay at a casino, or in a game amongst friends, the beer to be brought and left behind). If you and all of your opponents are equally skilled mathematically but some of you are socially inept but others have the politician's skills of lying and reading people, the socially inept ones will end up going home much poorer.

 

[FredericGos]

You are creating a straw man because nobody has said that.

Yes, the statement 'Math doesn't work in poker' seems to indicate that.

No, you can't, for the simple reason that you do not know which cards have been face down to the other players. Suppose you are dealt a pair of aces. If two other players were each dealt an ace, your probability of improving your pair with another ace or two is exactly zero -- and that is hidden information that hopefully you cannot know. (Hopefully because there have been online scams where the hidden information has been made available to some select players.)

Yes, you can. The holdings of your opponent is irrelevant to the calculation. You only deal with the cards you have seen. In holdem, the 2 cards in your hand and the 3 cards on the table (on the flop). That's 5 out of 52. So if you have say 2 hearts, and the table has 2 hearts and a spade, the probability of the next card being a heart is 9/47 = 0.19 etc.

You just make the classical mistake any poker players makes in the beginning by even thinking what your opponent might hold. It doesn't matter.

No, you can't, assuming you do not know what their hole cards are.

Suppose you have a pair of aces in the hole and you bet first. A few people stay into see the flop (a deuce), only one other stays to see the turn (also a deuce). You have two pair, guaranteed. After you check or bet, the other person goes all in. Are you going to call because the odds of him beating your two pair is small?

Fist of all yes you can. And secondly, maybe i'll call, your example depends on how much he bets compares to the size of the pot, so i don't know the answer.

You can put you opponent on a weighted range of hands he might hold and use that to calculate the probability he beats you. It's done all the time. It's hard yes, but it's done.
Maybe the word EXACT in my post was a bit misguiding. But given enough samples, we get there.

A top-notch poker is mathematically skilled, socially aware, and occasionally bets on absolute garbage.

Of course. He calculates his bluffing frequency based on his opponents tendencies. All done with statistics, probability and combinatorics.

You seem to misunderstand that I'm treating this game statistically. We are not talking about a single hand and how we might 'know' what he holds. Of course we can't. But we can statistically infer a lot. Especially when we need to calculate our EV in specific situations.

Now, It must be said that these calculations can be very difficult, and the more complicated one are not done at the table. Especially when using ranges. That's why good players will go over their played hands one by one after playing a session and 'do the math' on each hand. This way they train their brain to recognize situations and learn tricks to estimate their EV at the table.

The social aspect (tells) play a minor part in modern poker between professionals. They are all VERY good at disguising their holding. Look at a guy like fergusson. He excells at keeping the same posture and making the excact same gestures everytime, regardsless of his holdings.

And lastl. Don't make the mistake to think that poker shows can tell you much. First of all, they are SHOWS and these guys get paid to gamble, because that's what people want to see on TV, big bluffs etc. It's not the way it works.

Shows like the early levels of the WSOP main event are much more accurate. But then again, these are filled with bad players so you can't infer much there either.

 

[NobodySpecial]

Yeah, it's called a bluff. If you can't pull off a bluff you cannot be a good poker player.

Supposedly Von Neuman (the inventor of much of game theory) was a terrible poker player and the other physicists regularly took money off him because he never understood this and always played the logically perfect bet for the hand he held.

 

[JaredJames]

Yes, you can. The holdings of your opponent is irrelevant to the calculation. You only deal with the cards you have seen. In holdem, the 2 cards in your hand and the 3 cards on the table (on the flop). That's 5 out of 52. So if you have say 2 hearts, and the table has 2 hearts and a spade, the probability of the next card being a heart is 9/47 = 0.19 etc.

I diagree, the odds can't be 9/47 (I'm not too sharp on probability so correct me here if I'm wrong). The opponent has 2 cards therefore the odds are dependent on what they have.

If they do not hold a heart then the odds of one coming out are 9/45, if they do hold a heart the odds of one coming out are 8/45. Adjust the odds dependent on the number of players and number of hearts held.

You have to include their hand or the maths doesn't work. 9/47 is simply stating that out of the 47 cards you don't have, there are 9 left and if you were to draw from all 47 there is a 9/47 chance you get a heart.

If you have five players, and you have 2 hearts and there's 2 on the table, you could assume that they don't have any and say there is a 9/39 chance of a heart being drawn. It could very well be that each of the other players has a heart which means the real odds of one being drawn are 5/39, which is quite a bit lower.

Probability might be able to give you a rough estimate, but when it comes down to it you have 2 cards per other player that are effectively out of the game and therefore do have an impact on your predicitons.

 

[FredericGos]

I diagree, the odds can't be 9/47 (I'm not too sharp on probability so correct me here if I'm wrong).

Disagree all you will but it's the way it's calculated. :) I once read somewhere (and the math behind) that it actually doesn't matter if you consider your opponent's holdings or not in this calculation. you will get the same result. Something to do with the fact that if you consider your opponents holdings, that too becomes a probability and it all cancels etc. I tried to find that article but could not.

Anyway, that's the way it's calculated in every book, article and what not. It's easy to lookup if you don't believe me :)

You can start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_probability_(Texas_hold_'em)

 

[DaveC426913]

I diagree, the odds can't be 9/47 (I'm not too sharp on probability so correct me here if I'm wrong). The opponent has 2 cards therefore the odds are dependent on what they have.

No. In this limited sense, Fred is right. It does not matter what your opponent has. If you see 5 cards, then there are 47 cards unexposed. Those 47 cards do not have faces until you see them. They may be in the deck, they may be in another player's hand, but it has no effect on how you play.

 

[JaredJames]

No. In this limited sense, Fred is right. It does not matter what your opponent has. If you see 5 cards, then there are 47 cards unexposed. Those 47 cards do not have faces until you see them. They may be in the deck, they may be in another player's hand, but it has no effect on how you play.

I don't see it. Not saying you're wrong, just don't understand it.

If there are 47 cards left, I agree that there is a 9/47 chance of a heart coming out. But, there aren't 47 cards left. There's 45 (assuming one opponent). You can't select from the opponents hand so there are three available sets of odds here:

1) Opponent does not have a heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 9/45
2) Opponent has one heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 8/45
3) Opponent is doctor who, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 7/45

So the odds of a heart coming out of the remaining deck decrease depending on your opponents hand.

Like I said, not too good at probability.

It's like having a bag with 5 red balls and 5 blue balls. To win you must select a blue ball. Now the odds are 5/10 that you choose a blue ball.
Someone takes two randomly and doesn't show you. Just because you haven't seen them, doesn't mean the odds of you getting a blue when you stick your hand in haven't changed.
It's either 5/8, 4/8 or 3/8 depending on what they have taken. The odds go from being in your favour to against you.

Or is this difference just too insignificant in cards to matter? I suppose you could play it safe and go with 4/8 and get a rough answer for the above.

 

[Evo]

I don't see it. Not saying you're wrong, just don't understand it.

If there are 47 cards left, I agree that there is a 9/47 chance of a heart coming out. But, there aren't 47 cards left. There's 45 (assuming one opponent). You can't select from the opponents hand so there are three available sets of odds here:

1) Opponent does not have a heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 9/45
2) Opponent has one heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 8/45
3) Opponent is doctor who, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 7/45

So the odds of a heart coming out of the remaining deck decrease depending on your opponents hand.

Like I said, not too good at probability.

It's like having a bag with 5 red balls and 5 blue balls. To win you must select a blue ball. Now the odds are 5/10 or that you choose a blue ball.
Someone takes two randomly and doesn't show you. Just because you haven't seen them, doesn't mean the odds of you getting a blue when you stick your hand in haven't changed.
It's either 5/8, 4/8 or 3/8 depending on what they have taken. The odds go from being in your favour to against you.

Or is this difference just too insignificant in cards to matter?

Not all of those 47 cards are playable either, the top card is discarded (burned) each time the dealer deals.

http://boardgames.about.com/cs/poker/a/texas_rules.htm

 

[DaveC426913]

I don't see it. Not saying you're wrong, just don't understand it.

If there are 47 cards left, I agree that there is a 9/47 chance of a heart coming out. But, there aren't 47 cards left. There's 45 (assuming one opponent). You can't select from the opponents hand so there are three available sets of odds here:

1) Opponent does not have a heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 9/45
2) Opponent has one heart, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 8/45
3) Opponent is doctor who, odds of a heart coming out of the deck = 7/45

So the odds of a heart coming out of the remaining deck decrease depending on your opponents hand.

And since you make your calculations without seeing your opponent's hand, the probability of what he might or might not have is irrelevant to your calculation. The probability of you turning up any given card is simply 1/the number of cards you have not seen; it does not matter where those cards are.


Reduce it to 4 cards: 2 red, 2 black. Your objective is to get a "flush" of two cards.

You are each dealt 1 card; you turn up a black card.
There are 3 cards you have not seen: 2 in the deck, 1 in your opponent's hand.

What are the chances that the next card you are dealt will be black? They are 1-in-3.

 

[FredericGos]

Not all of those 47 cards are playable either, the top card is discarded (burned) each time the dealer deals.

Which doesn't matter either because no one sees it.

Look, I had a pretty hard time grasping this myself a couple of years ago and I don't blame you. Intuitively, we think we should consider this, but I assure you it's done this way for a reason that eludes me right now. I'll try to find that article which explains why pretty convincingly.

The only thing that matters is the number of cards we have seen. It could be a pot with 5 players in it, the calculation is the same.

 

[Evo]

Which doesn't matter either because no one sees it.

You're right, they aren't going to played, I'm tired.

 

[D H]

The holdings of your opponent is irrelevant to the calculation.

If you want to lose.

Any information that gives insight into your opponent's hole cards will make you better off than a simple calculation that ignores this information. The information can be something stupid such as your opponent getting all fidgety. However, that is just as much a potzer mistake as hoping the river card will fill an inside straight.

Just because top-notch players don't have tells does not mean they aren't telling you anything. They are. They have to open the pot, check, call, raise, or fold. That is information, and top-notch players know how to heuristically take advantage of that scant information. (Fully applying Bayes' law here is a bit beyond the scope of a human. Some kind of electronic connection to a computer doing those calculations for the player is, I suspect, a form of cheating.)

 

[FredericGos]

If you want to lose.

This is out of context. In the raw calculation given in the previous post it does not matter.

Any information that gives insight into your opponent's hole cards will make you better off than a simple calculation that ignores this information. The information can be something stupid such as your opponent getting all fidgety. However, that is just as much a potzer mistake as hoping the river card will fill an inside straight.

Of course. That's why I'm saying that you put your opponent on a weighted range and that you use that info to judge if he beats you. But in the calculation about whether or not you hit your hand on future streets, its irrelevant. If you know your opponent raised the pot preflop, and you know he is tight and only raises 5% of hands, you take that into account, etc. and much more.

Just because top-notch players don't have tells does not mean they aren't telling you anything. They are. They have to open the pot, check, call, raise, or fold. That is information, and top-notch players know how to heuristically take advantage of that scant information. (Fully applying Bayes' law here is a bit beyond the scope of a human. Some kind of electronic connection to a computer doing those calculations for the player is, I suspect, a form of cheating.)

yes, excactly. You use betting patterns to infer their holdings and tendencies, which in turn guide you towards choosing your own frequencies for doing this and that. That's why poker players talk about game theory a lot. Applying bayes is also used, but more to judge unknown players.

I started this responding to this thread when I saw that highly scientific people had the misconception about math not really being relevant to poker. I just wanted to tell them they are wrong, and the youngsters out there making millions online at poker today are using ONLY math basically, and treating the game as one giant life long monte carlo simulation. And then the old timers berate them they play live ;) But I know which ones I will put my money on.

 

[Evo]

I started this responding to this thread when I saw that highly scientific people had the misconception about math not really being relevant to poker. I just wanted to tell them they are wrong, and the youngsters out there making millions online at poker today are using ONLY math basically, and treating the game as one giant life long monte carlo simulation. And then the old timers berate them they play live ;) But I know which ones I will put my money on.

Playing a computer game is nothing like playiing for real. The two can't even be compared. We weren't talking about computer games.

 

[FredericGos]

Playing a computer game is nothing like playiing for real. The two can't even be compared. We weren't talking about computer games.

Woot? Ok, Evo I have the highest regard for your posts around here, but now you're just being ridiculous. Sorry. Now, fold. You obviously have no idea what you are writing about ;)

 

[Evo]

Woot? Ok, Evo I have the highest regard for your posts around here, but now you're just being ridiculous. Sorry. Now, fold. You obviously have no idea what you are writing about ;)

You can't observe someone playing online. Playing on a computer requires none of the skills of observation or the ability to manipulate your opponent by giving incorrect signals. Kids that play online wouldn't know what hit them if they sat facing a skilled player.

You've been going on about computer gaming all of this time, haven't you?

 

[Anonymous217]

There is math involved in poker, just not hard math. It's simply algebra, probabilities, and remembering the probability of certain events to happen given some cards already shown (flush draw, etc.). Pot odds isn't hard to calculate either. That's why a math major would barely ever have an advantage over some other major. Because the math that IS involved in poker is math that almost anyone who's taken high school algebra can do given enough practice.

Any poker professional or any book written by a professional will talk about pot odds and bet wages in a given pot, etc. This is math, albeit very simple. Here's an example: you have the nuts. you think the other guy is going for a flush draw. You will need to use math to determine the greatest amount to bet without having the person fold. This will give you a general idea on what to bet and you can increase/decrease by some depending on your intuition. It's not like you would simply throw all your chips in and hope he calls, or bet very little because it's ensured he would call by pot odds. There's always a middle-ground and math helps determine that along with intuition.

And I think many of you do in fact have a limited knowledge on poker. Yes, you can read people in online poker. Poker pros play online the majority of the time when they aren't in a specific tournament and there are many professionals who are known for their online play (Gus Hansen, etc.). It's just a different type of reading via response time, playing style, etc. to determine if the person is bluffing or not for example. Although there are less factors to be able to go on, there still are a few.

 

[FredericGos]

You can't observe someone playing online. Playing on a computer requires none of the skills of observation or the ability to manipulate your opponent by giving incorrect signals. Kids that play online wouldn't know what hit them if they sat facing a skilled player.

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. Just ask any top pro who has been playing poker for 40 years. They will tell you that those young guys cannot be intimidated nor read easily. They just sit there like statues and make play after play. Just like they do at home in front of the PC. Why do you think that most major tournaments today have an end game filed of young internet pros owning everything?

You are just talking like Phil Helmuth now, and even he has to admit that in order to deal with the math guys, he has to change his game and learn the new way of poker.

You have a lot of research to do. The whole poker world has changed drastically in the last 10 years as a result of the math/statistic approach to the game. And if you don't believe that for some reason, then whatever. Living in the past is fine with me, but I thought that facts were in the high seat around here.

 

[FredericGos]

You've been going on about computer gaming all of this time, haven't you?

Not really :) I've been trying to open your eyes about the fact that good poker players use game theory a lot. And last I looked, Game theory is part of the math body of knowledge.

Online or live doesn't make a big difference if you are good at it. The rules are the same, except the pace is much slower live so the math geeks actually have an advantage live, if they can keep their patience.

 

[Anonymous217]

Here's a very simple example: preflop, you're dealt 2/7 offsuit and you're not button, SB, or BB. Obviously you would fold because anyone who plays poker can tell you that 2/7 offsuit is the worst hand possible and will give you very bad odds. Now why do people fold? Because of the odds, ie. probability/math. And the more you know about math (by incorporating SB, BB, odds, etc.), the better you will be at determining whether or not to fold preflop or to call/raise when given a certain hand and position. Doing this more and more will eventually ingrain into intuition, but that intuition was developed via math. It's not simply by going by your "gut" but by your gut reaction after having done enough math subconsciously from experience.
Here's another example:
You're dealt Q/9 suited and you have 500 chips. The pot is 100 currently, you're SB, and it takes 25 to call. Should you call? This is where math makes a big deal.

 

[turbo]

I would love to get into a poker game with some of the people contributing to this thread. My shift-mates and I would get together for a few hours after our last night shift, and play poker. Games were dealers' choice, and I paid a lot of attention to how unsettled the other players might be, so I could call a game that would get me the most money. Some people would chase worthless hands if you called 5-card draw, jacks or better to open, progressive. They knew that the pots could be really big, and would refuse to fold when they had crap, just hoping for a miracle. Another favorite was 7-card roll your own high-low where the highest and lowest hand split the pot and the lowest hole card in your hand was wild. People had some pretty odd strategies to get a piece of the pot, and they were sometimes quite easy to read.

I was the crew's machine tender (lead operator) and the backtender (second operator) was a good friend, and we were the highest and second-highest paid members of the crew. Unfortunately for our crew-members, we generally came in 1,2 in winnings, too. Small stakes, but we generally each came out with $45-30 a week. You get WAY more valuable info from other players than most people realize. Want to calculate odds based on shown cards? Knock yourself out. Better players are subtly checking your "tells" and watching your betting patterns.