the essentials, what every true poker player must ..

[rog 0]

the problem with the long run is that nobody really knows how long the long run is. the fact is, most people will never get into the long run as is could be millions upon millions of hands. because of probability, people tend to be in some part of the curve, either high or low, at any given point in time. someone could theoretically never win a hand while others may get repeatedly smacked in the face by the deck. this is what appears to us as luck but it is actually just probability.

Not sure what your point about the long run is, but statisticians do know what the long run is. I dont, but I know that they can calculate it in terms of standard deviations. The more hands, the more tightly all the data points cluster around the mean. The standard deviations become much tighter (in terms of percentages). At any moment in time, you could be up or down a little bit strictly in terms of "luck", but you will never be down significantly over a million hands. If you are, then the universe is on the fritz. Could someone lose with AA 1000 times consecutively? Theoretically yes, but it aint going to happen in reality.Rog

[justblaze 0]

the problem with the long run is that nobody really knows how long the long run is. the fact is, most people will never get into the long run as is could be millions upon millions of hands. because of probability, people tend to be in some part of the curve, either high or low, at any given point in time. someone could theoretically never win a hand while others may get repeatedly smacked in the face by the deck. this is what appears to us as luck but it is actually just probability.

Not sure what your point about the long run is, but statisticians do know what the long run is. I dont, but I know that they can calculate it in terms of standard deviations. The more hands, the more tightly all the data points cluster around the mean. The standard deviations become much tighter (in terms of percentages). At any moment in time, you could be up or down a little bit strictly in terms of "luck", but you will never be down significantly over a million hands. If you are, then the universe is on the fritz. Could someone lose with AA 1000 times consecutively? Theoretically yes, but it aint going to happen in reality.Rog

guarantee its happened to somebody, somewhere, once at least. Mathematical inevitability.

[shamhawks 0]

there are a lot of pro blackjack players, but most of the casinos don't take kindly to them...they can do everything to keep their edge (casinos) but you do the same thing and they ban you :x

[53o 0]

The Luck Vs. Skill debate, I think, can be summed up like this: Luck determines what cards you get and whether you hit hands or not. Skill allows you to maximize your winnings while minimizing your losses with those cards. I've found this to be very true at limit games.

[faketree 0]

the problem with the long run is that nobody really knows how long the long run is. the fact is, most people will never get into the long run as is could be millions upon millions of hands. because of probability, people tend to be in some part of the curve, either high or low, at any given point in time. someone could theoretically never win a hand while others may get repeatedly smacked in the face by the deck. this is what appears to us as luck but it is actually just probability.

Not sure what your point about the long run is, but statisticians do know what the long run is. I dont, but I know that they can calculate it in terms of standard deviations. The more hands, the more tightly all the data points cluster around the mean. The standard deviations become much tighter (in terms of percentages). At any moment in time, you could be up or down a little bit strictly in terms of "luck", but you will never be down significantly over a million hands. If you are, then the universe is on the fritz. Could someone lose with AA 1000 times consecutively? Theoretically yes, but it aint going to happen in reality.Rog

They actually don't know what the long run is. The long run is purely a theoretical idea. They can calculate how things should turn out over a million hands, two million, 5 billion etc. But because of probability, it is possible that someone could be on the low part of the curve for twenty years straight. Two people can play the same amount of hands over say 1 million hands, the same exact way (assuming equal skill), and one could be a millionaire and the other could be dead broke. Where is the long run for these people?My point is only that you can do everything right all the time and still be on the low part of the curve, or be 'unlucky'.

[TheIceman05 0]

Look...The idea of poker as a "game of chance" is an absolutely ludicrous one. There is chance involved in small samples (ie, someone hitting a 2-outer on back to back hands), but that doesn't make it a game of luck. Consider some analgous situations. You and a friend decide to do some gambling. You negotiate for a few minutes, and decide that he'll give you 6-1 odds that if you flip a quarter twice, it won't come TAILS both times. You accept and lose, because it comes down T-H. You reenter negotiations and convince him to give you 2-1 odds that it won't come down heads on the next flip. You accept and it comes down tails. Did you get unlucky? Of course you did. But THE SKILL IS IN THE NEGOTIATION! If you did this 10 times, you'd start to see positive results. If you did this 100 times, you're going to be WAY ahead. Sometimes, no matter the odds, you'll lose. But by putting yourself in situations where someone ELSE must get lucky, you will always end up ahead. Bad players don't get bad beats put on them, because they're so rarely ahead in the first place....Someone disagree, please.Iceman

[pkarcher 0]

guarantee its happened to somebody, somewhere, once at least. Mathematical inevitability.

Not really. Some things are so unlikely that they never happen in reality. This is an off the wall example, but I remember one of my chemistry teachers describing some theoretical molecule to us. Even though he could draw it on paper and even assign a probablility of its existence, he said that even if you took a sampling of every molecule in the entire universe you still may not find one. I guarantee no one has ever lost 1000 times in a row with pocket aces.Mathematical improbability.

[pkarcher 0]

to add some numbers to my last comment, let's just say you are only 10% to win with pocket aces 90% to lose. That's not correct but I'm just being really overly conservative. The odds that someone will lose 1000 times in a row are 1.74x10^-44%. In other words, if there were 1,000,000 poker tables with 10 people each that operated 24 hours a day 365 days a year for the last 1000 years, you still wouldn't even have anywhere near a 1% chance of someone losing with pocket aces 1000 times in a row.

[A3DDFAN 0]

you only have one life. do the right things. but do what you want.make the one life you have work for you not the other way around.nick

[sprfcta 0]

Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.

[Private 0]

I'm really happy to see the amount of replies i got from this thread.But what i wanted to know MOST* was if the things he said were true. I've read various articles on poker players and everything, and what i can't help just going back into my memory bank and listening to his words. What made me believe him is that:1) He said you have to come from a gambling/poker family (Lederer, Annie Duke, Chris moneymaker- gambling.)2) He said you have to get involved in crimes- (not sure about this but Raymer was almost robbed by poker players, Daniel Negreanu and John Juanda have friends in prison that commited crimes)3) You're going to lose your friends- really i havent lost many friends, but whenever i ask anybody @ my school if they want to play, they always say no... when the answer used to always be yes. 4) I dont play for "fun" anymore. lol. But i do teach many people some of my tricks and invite them out to tourneys and such.Really he said to me, "Private you're really a nice guy, its just that you have this sickness.... other than that, you're ok"I REALLY recognize all the similarities with poker and other games such as pool and chess. I used to belong to a gamesclub where they'd play backgammon chess darts and all these other games for money. The best players in canada. (not for backgammon, but for chess)I realized that as i got better at these games (chess and pool), i noticed more stuff about the players, i knew who i could beat, i knew who i couldnt. I realized the type of people there, and how they dress. as i got better, i started to notice the exact same things. The people that play these games are generally the same. Smokers, old blue jeans, not in good shape. The two communities are VERY alike, and require almost the same amount of mental strength. If anyone else here knows if the pro's went through this kind of thing, i would REALLY like to know, and i am betting a lot of other people here would also. -thanks(it may seem that i am stating the negatives of the game, but really i just want to know what im getting myself into before its too late to turn back. Im still not gonna quit my dayjob or anything like that im gonna try and concentrate on school, but i would want this poker thing to work out, because i truely think i have a chance- even if it may seem like a pipedream)

[TheIceman05 0]

Look, I'm sorry to break this to you, but the logic behind your argument is terribly flawed. I'm going to go down your list, one by one.ARG1- You must come from a gambling/poker family. Howard Lederer doesn't come from a gambling family, does he? He just got his sister involved. Daniel Negreanu? John Juanda? Were these people reared by gambling fiends or poker player? Of course not. And even if they were, it's still true that PLENTY of people are successful as card players without having family that play professionally. ARG2- You have to get involved in crimes. So you point to a guy who was unsuccessfully robbed, and two people who know someone in jail. People with money are robbed all the time (atheletes, for example). If that's your argument, don't ever get a good job, kiddo. And I know 3 people in prison. 1 is a very old friend. I'm a student. Does this prove, somehow, that being a student will lead to people I know being jailed?? OF COURSE NOT! LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO GET OLDER KNOW PEOPLE IN JAIL! Mike Matusow was arrested for slinging coke... it had nothing to do with his being a professional poker playerARG3- Your friends don't want to play poker with you. So don't play with them. They're still your friends. Daniel Negreanu moved from Toronto, Ontario to Las Vegas NV. He is still in contact with many of his old friends, and made many NEW ones BECAUSE of poker. Once again, getting older means you will lose friends. Poker doesn't.ARG4- You don't play for fun anymore? What's your point? No one does his/her job for fun. That's why it's... a JOB! You do it to win money... that's what a job is. But I bet you still enjoy playing. The point isn't whether or not you still "play for fun" but, rather, whether you have more fun playing poker than you would, say, working a 9-5 as a car salesman. You're making claims that are pretty unsubstantiated. Do all poker players look alike, act alike? In some ways, yes... but that's a sociological phenomenon true of ALL careers, of all settings where people spend a lot of time together. Think about Chau Giang, Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negranu, Chip Reese, John Juanda, Doyle Brunson, Allen Cunningham, Phil Hellmuth, Layne Flack, Howard Lederer, and Jen Harman.... How similar are they?Please, Private, I'd like to read a response. Without animosity,Iceman

[tmiesen359 0]

excelent post iceman....... everything is right and it sounds like the dealer in private's post may have had a few too many cards thrown at him..... the dealer has good advice, but it does seem like he watched too much "tilt." The "sickness" he is referring to is really just a thrill seeking thing for teenagers, and private is doing something constructive with that sickness rather than destructive (ie alcohol or drugs or excessive partying.) I'm 16 as well and there really isn't much i'd rather be doing. And yeah, sometimes you'll lose friends because of a new hobby, but i can't even number the amount of friends i've made from playing cards the last year and a half.

[kouta43 0]

So you think poker is 100% skill. I never realised you could control whether or not you hit your flush draws. anyone with any poker experience knows that poker is a combo of skill and luck

I never realized people could make sarcastic replies to topics about which they obviously know nothing about. Why do you think there are no pro blackjack players, or roulette players, or craps players, but there is a long list of pro poker players? are these people just the luckiest people alive? And if they were relying on luck, dont you think they would play a game where the payoff was bigger for being lucky? Think before you speak.PS geez theres a lot of T.O. players on here. PM me if you have regular weekday games! i need action! the people on the bus to rama smell.

Unbelievable- first this guy takes a pot shot at me by not even responding to my actual argument- that poker is a combo of both skill and luck- thats why there are poker pros as they are skilled anough to make a living- and why do you think daniel wins some times and loses sometimes at the big game- that word luck, sometimes he gets good cards and sometimes he doesnt, I'm sure against the quality of opposition he is up against if he continually got bad luck he would continually lsoe for examople.Also nice comment about telling me to think before i speak and then say there are no proffesional blackjack players... just dont speak at all maybe

[Private 0]

Look, I'm sorry to break this to you, but the logic behind your argument is terribly flawed. I'm going to go down your list, one by one.ARG1- You must come from a gambling/poker family. Howard Lederer doesn't come from a gambling family, does he? He just got his sister involved. Daniel Negreanu? John Juanda? Were these people reared by gambling fiends or poker player? Of course not. And even if they were, it's still true that PLENTY of people are successful as card players without having family that play professionally. ARG2- You have to get involved in crimes. So you point to a guy who was unsuccessfully robbed, and two people who know someone in jail. People with money are robbed all the time (atheletes, for example). If that's your argument, don't ever get a good job, kiddo. And I know 3 people in prison. 1 is a very old friend. I'm a student. Does this prove, somehow, that being a student will lead to people I know being jailed?? OF COURSE NOT! LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO GET OLDER KNOW PEOPLE IN JAIL! Mike Matusow was arrested for slinging coke... it had nothing to do with his being a professional poker playerARG3- Your friends don't want to play poker with you. So don't play with them. They're still your friends. Daniel Negreanu moved from Toronto, Ontario to Las Vegas NV. He is still in contact with many of his old friends, and made many NEW ones BECAUSE of poker. Once again, getting older means you will lose friends. Poker doesn't.ARG4- You don't play for fun anymore? What's your point? No one does his/her job for fun. That's why it's... a JOB! You do it to win money... that's what a job is. But I bet you still enjoy playing. The point isn't whether or not you still "play for fun" but, rather, whether you have more fun playing poker than you would, say, working a 9-5 as a car salesman. You're making claims that are pretty unsubstantiated. Do all poker players look alike, act alike? In some ways, yes... but that's a sociological phenomenon true of ALL careers, of all settings where people spend a lot of time together. Think about Chau Giang, Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negranu, Chip Reese, John Juanda, Doyle Brunson, Allen Cunningham, Phil Hellmuth, Layne Flack, Howard Lederer, and Jen Harman.... How similar are they?Please, Private, I'd like to read a response. Without animosity,Iceman

Just to clairify, i never said anything about YOU MUST get involved in something, and i dont think he meant that either. What he probably meant were those were the types of things i might have to endure.... he said "you think you're gonna be an honest guy and just gamble and come back home- YOU'RE NOT!"No offense, but the poker community isnt exactly the ideal community for anybody, there used to be a lot of smoking, drinking, drugs etc... Poker itself has a really bad image- for a reason too. I know Daniel himself agrees with this, and has even tried to show everyone the lighter side of poker, but in the back of my mind i always had the feeling that poker was always associated with this darkness- robbing, drugs, basically the "wrong" stuff. I have read some articles about these top professionals who started DEALING at card clubs when they were like 12!!! I mean can u believe that? Those people must have came from a poker family. Daniel himself started really young- i mean most people at his age would probably still be in highschool. John Juanda was raised in indonesia- does him family play cards? i dont know- but for the most part... i think a lot of people playing poker have several of these characteristics.

[TheIceman05 0]

Then your argument's not only illogical, it's meaningless. So far, you've said, "Poker has some negative things involved with it, and some people have done some things that are, in my opinion, not good. John Juanda might be from a card playing family, and card players start young, sometimes."I'm really not trying to be an ass, but you started out making some pretty heavy claims, and your argument has devolved into... well, nothing. It may be the case that you're uncomfortable gambling, and that's fine... but to imply that poker deserves its seedy image anymore without giving any real evidence is not just ridiculous, it's irresponsible. Don't you think that, maybe, one of the reasons poker has such a negative image is because people like you say, "Hmmm... poker's got a bad name, so it must deserve it! Poker players are involved in crime, cheating, and other bad stuff!"Not being mean. I'm just highly critical of your viewpoint, because it makes no sense.Iceman

[rog 0]

Could someone lose with AA 1000 times consecutively? Theoretically yes, but it aint going to happen in reality.

guarantee its happened to somebody, somewhere, once at least. Mathematical inevitability.

Okay, I'm a geek, so I have to follow up on this. Anything with a finite non-zero probability is technically possible, but some events are so mind-bogglingly improbable that they are impossible in practical terms unless you are a character in a Douglas Adams novel. This is one of those cases. The odds of losing with AA against 9 random hands, if every hand is in at the showdown is about 70%. The odds of losing under these conditions 1000 times in a row is .7^1000 (^ = to the power of). That works out to roughly 1 in 10 ^ 154, or 1 / 1, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000If every man woman and child who ever lived played billions of hands every day, and every hand had AA dealt to someone, and every hand ever dealt was shown down, it would still be astronomically improbable that anyone ever lost 1000 times in a row with AA. It's may be a mathematical inevitability given infinite time, but we've only passed an EXTREMELY short finite amount of time. Still like your guarantee? ;)In fact the odds of losing with AA 100 times in a row is in the neighborhood of 1 in a quadrillion or so. I'd guarantee that this has never happened. 20 times in a row? 1 in 1250 more or less. Yeah okay...this may have happened. That guy is the unluckiest b***ard alive.The point? In the long run, large deviations from the norm are extremely improbable...often so much so that they are more or less impossible. The odds always get even. :)Rog

[Private 0]

Then your argument's not only illogical, it's meaningless. So far, you've said, "Poker has some negative things involved with it, and some people have done some things that are, in my opinion, not good. John Juanda might be from a card playing family, and card players start young, sometimes."I'm really not trying to be an ass, but you started out making some pretty heavy claims, and your argument has devolved into... well, nothing. It may be the case that you're uncomfortable gambling, and that's fine... but to imply that poker deserves its seedy image anymore without giving any real evidence is not just ridiculous, it's irresponsible. Don't you think that, maybe, one of the reasons poker has such a negative image is because people like you say, "Hmmm... poker's got a bad name, so it must deserve it! Poker players are involved in crime, cheating, and other bad stuff!"Not being mean. I'm just highly critical of your viewpoint, because it makes no sense.Iceman

I dont see how it DOESNT make sense- the fact is that many poker players have been involved in crime. I initally just started this thread to see if this was all true- that many have also been involved in cheating and other stuff. Then why dont you tell us why poker has such a bad image??If i would have to pinpoint it, it wouldnt just be gambling, it would also involve everything that is related to that sort of stuff.

[TheIceman05 0]

I dont see how it DOESNT make sense- the fact is that many poker players have been involved in crime. I initally just started this thread to see if this was all true- that many have also been involved in cheating and other stuff. Then why dont you tell us why poker has such a bad image??If i would have to pinpoint it, it wouldnt just be gambling, it would also involve everything that is related to that sort of stuff.

"Jews control the liberal media." "Homosexuals are power hungry, sex-craven maniacs." "Black people aren't nearly as smart as white people.".... Why don't you tell me why all those things aren't true? For a time, LOTS of people (intelligent, well-educated, even brilliant people) believed these things. Plenty do now. Ignorance, my friend. Mr. Negreanu is a respectable businessman, from my (relatively well-educated) perspective. My mom thinks he's a degenerate gambler. She thinks poker's a game of luck, and poker is played in back rooms and people get shot in Las Vegas at the Bellagio. See? See how she's ignorant? And wrong, too?For an argument to be valid, its consequence must follow from its premises. Example of a valid argument: All women are evilJanet is a woman_______________(therefore) Janet is evilSee? No way Janet can't be evil if we accept the premises as true. Here's your argument:1) Some poker players are involved in crime (true)2) Some poker players have experienced cheating (true)______________________________________________3) Poker is a hotbed of cheating and causes unavoidable crimeYou're ignoring the fact that you will always be a target for crime (Greg Raymer) if you're famous or rich. You're ignoring that there's no CAUSAL link (that you've even anecdotally supplied) between crime and poker. Mike Matusow is in jail for something completely poker unrelated. I just think you're going about this all wrong... illogically.Ice

[ninthgate16 0]

Look man, I'm about as close as it comes to being a 16 year old pro poker player. Well actually I'm 17 now, but that's beside the point. I grew up in a rich area with educated upper class parents, and they don't tell me anything about poker. In fact they don't even like it, but they let me pursue my interest in it anyway. I'm no criminal besides playing poker online and in home games. I play a varsity sport and I will (hopefully) even go to an Ivy League school. Away from the tables, I'm you're stereotypical upper-middle class kid. Not every poker player is an out of shape smoker, or a criminal. The thing about losing your friends... eh, if you decide to dedicate enough time to poker sure you won't be able to spend as much time with them, but if they really are your friends you can find time to hang out. And to be honest, I'm no prodigy; there are a bunch of kids I've met who have been playing "professionally," and still lead normal, healthy lives. Good luck, and don't forget that your life is what you make of it, nothing is set in stone.

[tmiesen359 0]

as with the last poster, i am 17 and come from a relatively well off family with MANY friends who have a good sum of money.... and i don't think any of their parents are serious poker players. now, by no means am i a "professional" in terms that negreanu or any of the other pros are, but i do derive a good portion of my income from poker. Most of the kids i play with are in shape, with jobs, school, and regular lives. Most of them are not "degenerate gamblers" or bad kids of any type. Private, you are really getting your facts wrong. There is of course a bad side to poker, as there is a bad side to pro sports, hollywood, and even politics. But today, in this year, the good side has far exceeded the bad. There are always going to be bad apples, and that is the fact you are turning your head to.i don't know that "many" of the top pros are involved in crimes. many pros from any group of people are going to be involved in crime, that is just how it is. You can make the same argument for politicians, pro athletes, hell..... even teachers (MANY teachers are involved in illegal activities sometime)

[Smasharoo 0]

guarantee its happened to somebody, somewhere, once at least. Mathematical inevitability.People are goinng to die because they got hit in the head by someone else's head who was decapitated when they got hit by a metor too.Doesn't mean it's something I worry about.Poker played against inferior opponented over the long term is going to win you money. The long term in this case defined as a relatively small amount of heands, say 100,000. Poker played against equally skilled players with a rake is of course a losing propisiton.

[randomization 0]

One thing about poker that gives it such a bad name is that in the past most of the bad things said about it were true. In the 19th century, at any given poker table you sat down at, there could be a cheater, and men really were shot over the cards. People who have a negative opinion of poker these days usually are trafficking in stereotypes that are extremely outdated. The other fact about poker is that by most estimates, as many as 80 or 90% of players have lost more money than they've made, and that less than 10% of people who try to go pro make even an ok living playing cards. Even for those people who actually are good enough to make money playing poker, you have to be extremely disciplined, play well within your bankroll, save enough money to pay the rent when you start getting cold cards, avoid craps and other ways to lose money. Not many people can do that, and it's hard to know whether you're one of them. So even without cheating, playing poker for a living is usually a bad idea. It just happens to work out extremely well for a very small number of people.