Who's better at playing poker on average?

[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.

 

[Evo]

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?

Uh huh.

Poker players exist in a world of math and psychology. There are very distinct mathematical underpinnings to the game of poker and smart poker players know through study or through years of experience what those mathematical underpinnings are - even if they can't articulate them. However, poker also has a strong psychological side and players who are gifted at reading their opponents tend to win more than players who can't read their opponents. So successful poker players (success defined simply as long-term winning!) are usually those who have a grasp of the math of the game and the mental state of their competitors.

Video poker is nothing like real poker. Here you are playing to get the best possible hand.

http://scoblete.casinocitytimes.com/article/the-numbers-dont-lie-34721

And can the attitude.

Here's Annie Duke on "Gut Instincts".

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200705/annie-duke-gut-instincts

 

[FredericGos]

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.

No they aren't subtly doing anything unless they know they are against total beginners, which does not happen very often in a 10000$ buyin tournament. They are watching betting patterns yes, so is the opponent.

It's true if you play against the average 'I have no idea about poker but play for fun' type, which makes up 99.9% of the populace in home games and such.

I'm talking about experience poker players and the theory behind poker. I'm talking about the thousands of people who actually put in the work to get better by studying the statistics and learn that there are very simple ways to avoid physical tells and such. I taking about the FACT that math has turned the whole poker world upside down, and the fact that even a 1/2 cent poker game online is waaaaay harder than the average tourist 1/2 dollar live game in vegas.

Call it a video game, I don't mind. Ignore the odds and calculations etc. Whatever. Live in last decade, fine. :) Look at poker in the western style eyeball me eyeball you style, fine. It's just fantasy. Just like the poker shows with negreanu, brunson, gus hansen and the rest of them. They are pretty much all fish when they meet the hardcore guys. Most of the really great players today are not well known. They just sit at home making 7 figures a year.

Why do you guys obstinate and insist on living in the past? You are clearly writing against better knowledge but just refuse to learn. I guess you are just old and stubborn or something? But then again, I'm 44 and I understood this a couple of years ago after being in your camp for a while.

So. listen, learn and shut the f... up ffs ;)

Anyways, NOW I'M TIRED. Goodnight. Peace.

 

[FredericGos]

Uh huh.
Here's Annie Duke on "Gut Instincts".

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200705/annie-duke-gut-instincts

Oooh no. Not Annie Duke. ;)

Ok, I wanted to go to bed, but HAD to comment on that one. Annie duke is still really average. Just another over exposed poker pro player who was lucky to be in the right spot at the right time. (before the poker revolution But, I've heard that she is actually studying hard to become better so she can catch up. Just like many of the others. Negreanu is another who has publicly announced a campaign of selfstudy so he can 'come back' and beat the 100/200 stakes. :)

yawn.

 

[turbo]

No they aren't subtly doing anything unless they know they are against total beginners, which does not happen very often in a 10000$ buyin tournament. They are watching betting patterns yes, so is the opponent.

It's true if you play against the average 'I have no idea about poker but play for fun' type, which makes up 99.9% of the populace in home games and such.

I'm talking about experience poker players and the theory behind poker. I'm talking about the thousands of people who actually put in the work to get better by studying the statistics and learn that there are very simple ways to avoid physical tells and such. I taking about the FACT that math has turned the whole poker world upside down, and the fact that even a 1/2 cent poker game online is waaaaay harder than the average tourist 1/2 dollar live game in vegas.

Have you ever spent any time playing poker? 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.

 

[Anonymous217]

We're talking about maximizing your effectiveness in playing. We're not talking about just playing against beginners who try to emulate poker pros by also doing the math, but leaving clear cut tells as they fail to understand that you need to master specific tells and signs and that math isn't the only factor in winning a pot. Playing poker and using only the ability to read people and bluff well can get you only so far. Sure, it can win you a lot when you're playing with a group of friends, but that's because you guys are all novices. If you go to a tournament or play against any professional, you'd lose in a 500 hand battle if you can't or choose not to do the math. And if you do know the math, I'm sure you'd win even more when playing with the group of friends (given a large size of hands of course). I previously gave some examples regarding Texas Hold'em where math will clearly help you know when to F/C/B, and the same idea is true for other poker games.
To sum what FredericGos and I have been saying throughout this thread, you need both math and intuition/logic to do well in poker. Using only one can make you succeed, but you're not playing as effectively as possible.

 

[JaredJames]

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

Yep, definitely not getting it.

I think the problem here is I'm comparing the real odds with what you calculate.

Based on your example, let's put it another way:

You have 5 red balls and 5 blue balls in a bag. To win you have to draw a red ball.

Before the start of the game player 2 removes all 5 blue balls from the bag. Now, you know he's removed 5, but you don't know which colours.

Your calculations show you have 5/10 odds of pulling a red (which I agree with, the overall odds were that, but you took some out of play, that can never be drawn meaning you end up with a spread of possible odds for pulling a red - 5/5, 4/5, 3/5, 2/5, 1/5 and 0/5 - how can you make a judgement with that).

However, because of what occurred above, the actual odds of you pulling a red are 5/5. So your calculations are off by a massive factor. There is a big difference between making a bet on a 50% chance of pulling a red and a 100% chance of pulling a red.

I understand the whole "you doing your calcs without knowing your opponents" bit, and why you work with the overall odds. But I just don't see how they can be truly helpful given the error potential. A guide yes, but to play a game dependent on the numbers not knowing what your opponents have can't give you accuracy required.

 

[Evo]

We're talking about maximizing your effectiveness in playing. We're not talking about just playing against beginners who try to emulate poker pros by also doing the math, but leaving clear cut tells as they fail to understand that you need to master specific tells and signs and that math isn't the only factor in winning a pot. Playing poker and using only the ability to read people and bluff well can get you only so far. Sure, it can win you a lot when you're playing with a group of friends, but that's because you guys are all novices. If you go to a tournament or play against any professional, you'd lose in a 500 hand battle if you can't or choose not to do the math. And if you do know the math, I'm sure you'd win even more when playing with the group of friends (given a large size of hands of course). I previously gave some examples regarding Texas Hold'em where math will clearly help you know when to F/C/B, and the same idea is true for other poker games.
To sum what FredericGos and I have been saying throughout this thread, you need both math and intuition/logic to do well in poker. Using only one can make you succeed, but you're not playing as effectively as possible.

You seem to realize that it takes multiple skills, 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. My example was 5 card draw where you see no cards at all until the game ends, math really isn't going to help in that game, you have to to use reasoning and psychology. StautoryApe was thinking of Texas hold'em. That game I agreed needs multiple skills.

The different viewpoints expressed in this thread were based on the different types of poker due to no parameters set in the OP.

 

[DaveC426913]

Yep, definitely not getting it.

I think the problem here is I'm comparing the real odds with what you calculate.

Based on your example, let's put it another way:

You have 5 red balls and 5 blue balls in a bag. To win you have to draw a red ball.

Before the start of the game player 2 removes all 5 blue balls from the bag. Now, you know he's removed 5, but you don't know which colours.

Bzzt. In poker, the opponent does not get to affect the odds of what balls get removed. Thus, a RANDOM collection of balls are removed. Thus, your odds do not change, regardless of what you opponent does.

Repeat the 10-ball experiment a hundred times. The opponent pulls a RANDOM collection of 5 balls every time. Result: you pull a red ball 50% of the time.

 

[JaredJames]

Bzzt. In poker, the opponent does not get to affect the odds of what balls get removed. Thus, a RANDOM collection of balls are removed. Thus, your odds do not change, regardless of what you opponent does.

I've just understood it. I was going to use the below as a response to you, but realized the solution whilst writing it. I have elected to leave it here in case anyone else wants to read it to see if it helps them.

As per my post:
"you end up with a spread of possible odds for pulling a red - 5/5, 4/5, 3/5, 2/5, 1/5 and 0/5"

Random choice, the opponent pulls five balls. You are then left with one of the above odds of pulling a red. They range from in your favour to against you. I agree that over 100 goes you should see an even spread of each of these outcomes, but you are calculating with mean odds of 2.5/5 everytime which should give you a 'good' prediciton (shows you to have a good chance of choosing red) 50% of the time. Which means you should choose red 50% of the time - or 5/10.

Bold = my epiphany moment.

Told you I wasn't good with probability. Ta muchely for driving me to that solution!

 

[Office_Shredder]

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

 

[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?