You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
after eights
bryan1960
Member Posts: 205
poker is a game of luck and skill in that order,ask tikay,he knows.80/20 he says and i agree.the 20 even though outweighed by the 80 still plays a strong roll in the game there is no doubt.but so many poker players on ere and other sites seem to get the skill part totally out of context akining themselves to brain surgeons or nuclear scientists ,oh dear,if they ever relied on luck were in trouble.ITS A GAME OF CARDS 4 CRYING OUT LOUD nowhere near as complex as its cousin bridge or the likes of chess.its a game where the winner is the player who makes the best hand out of the 5 in the middle and the 2 theyre dealt simple.sometimes you can be dealt the nuts,dont see that in chess no nuts there ,well maybe a few.after 6 months of playing poker some players have managed to mix it with the "best"of them in major tourneys,walked in off the street and cleaned up,never happened that on the centre court at wimbledon i dont think,so lets shread this skill factor up a tadge please.my next gripe is the topic of the bankroll.this is significant in poker and gives great advantage to the players with massive rolls,they can afford to bet when odds are made against them etc,they can bully away and call big raises with nothing hoping to hit the flop with rubbish,this is fact.with thousands behind them they can take bad beats and not be dented,whereas the smallstack must be very careful what he bets on,i think the play on the bigger cash tables on here at times is diabolical,and the large stackers create this animal.theyre simply gambling.lets call minted players say after eightmints and the smallrollers say polos.when they mix the larger smooth choclatey coated after eights will always end up "sucking out " the poor polos till hes got one left in his pack at the bottom that nobody wants,and ends up slung into the bin as the after eight scores another "victory v".**** then probably go and sit on a hu table waiting for a polo or a mint imperial or a foxys to come along and inevitably sit understacked and be released of all theyre flavour.yes,roll is massive in poker and in no other game,no roll required in chess or darts or tennis,they rely on skill alone,poker, well any tom, rick and bryan can play that now,its easy.be lucky at the tables,you really do need it.
Comments
You also seem to show a remarkable level of ignorance of play at the higher levels of poker. If what you said were true then the players at those stakes would soon be broke. As other recent threads have shown, it is crucial to have the correct bankroll to play at any level of poker. Without this, it is not possible to play optimal poker. The benefit of having a sufficient bankroll is indeed that they can take bad beats and "not be dented". There is no "great advantage" to those with large bankrolls over those who have adequate bankroll for the level which they play. It is irrelevant if I have a bankroll that allows me 200 or 2000 buy-ins for the level that I play - the better player will win over time and the 200 buy-ins is sufficient for variance to even itself out.
No-one denies that there is a significant element of luck in poker but the better players will win over time and do so consistently.
It could certainly be argued that a bankroll is required for tennis (and other sports). The overheads of support staff have to be paid for and the bigger your bankroll the better your support staff are. This is then generally reflected in better performance on the court.
If there are any other points in your post that I have not rebutted, I apologise: I had trouble in picking out any real points in your "stream of consciousness" style of prose.
But heres the kicker to what your saying, people with a ton of money will inevitably win as they can gamble???? Not so i'm afraid.
Most of the big guns on here have built their roll not bought it, and they didn't do that by anything other than their ability for the game (which includes luck as this is built into the variance that they all cope with and beat). Ok somewhere along the lines they got lucky but that can only carry you so far. There is a big diff between a player with thousands behind them because they spent 5 years building it and a player who buys on for £10k because he's a Merchant Banker (and that is not meant as rhyming slang although considering my opinion of bankers at the moment that would be fitting). The main difference being that these Rich "Leisure Players" are the food that the higher stakes sharks feed on (well that and us small fries taking a shot at the bigger stakes). Don't misunderstand the 2, the guys with built rolls at the top of this tree posses enough skill to felt you. Not by gambling but by knowing what you are doing and keeping you unaware of what they are doing. Is there bad play at the high levels YES because thats where the rich fish are but that does not mean that the guys up there are only there because they are rich away from poker.... A lot of them have earned their way their and paid for the education !
You did not compare skill levels, you said that chess was "more complex".
This is patently not true.
In fact, even a board game like "Go" is more complex than chess as illustrated by the fact that computers have been programmed to beat the very best chess players yet there are no programs that can beat the best "Go" masters.
If you ever fancy a game of chess, I will be happy to play you provided there is a facility to turn "chat" off.
Yes, a "bankroll" is required for tennis. It is a very simple concept that you seem to be struggling to grasp.
At the lowest level this would be required to pay for equipment, court time and tournament entries.
At the higher levels it is required to pay for the support staff and other overheads needed to be able to compete at that level.
The answer is "variance".
personally i think you,ve got be a bit daft to sit down with these players if you,re not sufficiantly rolled and i,ve never been tempted even when i had a four figure roll.
I think what you mean is scared money? if you have £500 and sit at a 500nl table against a player who has 30 buy ins then yes, you lose all your arsenal of moves and the other player will bully u in to submission
Its not the guy who is rolled for this levels fault, that a player who cant afford to play and is scared money sits with him.
Its the other players inexperience and obvious lack of understanding of how the game works that is to blame for him undoubtadly going broke.