It can be challenging at times to clearly differentiate between luck and skill when playing poker. playing poker Some players undoubtedly appear to possess superior skills, yet it's often the fortunate ones who emerge victorious. We're all familiar with the saying in poker, 'I'd prefer to be lucky than skilled.'
So, does poker genuinely depend more on skill, or is it primarily influenced by luck? Let’s delve into the details.
Luck vs Skill in Poker
Even governmental bodies struggle to define whether poker is skill-based or luck-driven. So why are poker enthusiasts convinced they know the correct answer?
What we do know is that both skill and luck play a critical role in this game. How can we be so sure?
A game often contains a skill component if players can intentionally choose to lose.
Consider a game universally recognized as reliant on chance, like roulette. Is it possible to deliberately lose at roulette? Absolutely not. No matter the effort, there's always the possibility of winning.
But how about in poker? Can we intentionally lose? Certainly – we could simply fold every hand before the flop. As long as our opponent isn’t doing the same, we’re ensured to lose. Although few players would ever make such a poor decision, it highlights that our choices significantly affect our profitability in the game.
Effect of Luck on Sample Size
It’s also important to This is what sets poker apart from games such as blackjack. While blackjack does incorporate an element of skill, it might be more accurate to categorize it as a game of chance. The house (casino) has structured blackjack in a way that consistently makes it difficult to achieve long-term victory. (Of course, exceptions exist where the casino fails to maintain a strong enough advantage.)
So, why do players still engage in blackjack if they're likely to face losses over time? Despite the house possessing an edge, players can occasionally experience short-term luck and enjoy some winnings. In fact, when playing fewer hands, the outcomes are more heavily influenced by luck. As the number of hands increases, the likelihood of the house profiting grows. If someone were to play an infinite number of hands, the house would ultimately prevail.
Similar arguments can be made about poker, which contributes to the ongoing debate regarding skill and luck. If we were to participate in just one hand, it would largely come down to luck, albeit with some skill involved. However, as we play more hands, poker increasingly transitions into a game of skill with a luck component. Chance rarely balances out in a single hand of poker; instead, luck tends to distribute more evenly over a larger set of hands. hand of poker It is essential to understand that many players greatly underestimate the quantity of hands needed for poker to shift from being luck-driven to skill-based. We aren’t referring to hundreds or thousands of hands; we are talking about tens of thousands at the very least.
If someone has played fewer than approximately 10,000 hands, they likely lack sufficient data to determine whether they are winning or losing players. In fact, even samples of 50,000 or 100,000 hands may not provide a clear picture.
Variance is HUGE
The following image displays a simulation of expected value. It indicates what we might anticipate regarding statistical variance in cash games. The player depicted is a verified 6bb/100 winner (meaning they earn 6 big blinds on average for every 100 hands), and the graph presents the range of possible outcomes across 100,000 hands.
The simulation runs 100 times, showcasing both the best and worst possible results on the graph. The black dotted line illustrates a steady 6bb/100 win rate, representing the average outcome.
Notably, it is indeed feasible for a 6bb/100 winner (a respectable win rate in contemporary games) to report a loss after playing 100,000 hands. Although uncommon, given enough hands, it will eventually occur.
We can also recognize that losing players can experience unexpected winning streaks. There are stories of individuals who won big over 50,000 hands, quitting their regular jobs, only to realize they are, in the long run, losing players.
Our exploration has mainly focused on cash games, but a similar scenario applies, possibly even more so, for tournament players.
This situation is particularly relevant for live tournament players who participate in a limited number of events annually. It’s possible that years could pass before variance balances out. In many instances, the effects of variance might persist throughout one's lifetime. Variance is much larger in poker tournaments than it is for cash games It is a fact that a stroke of luck in poker can be the crucial factor separating extraordinary success from perpetual failure. Nevertheless, this doesn't imply that one should depend solely on luck to achieve success.
Luck in Poker – A Myth?
You may have encountered players who carry 'lucky' charms or card protectors to each live tournament. While luck does exist, allowing some individuals to consistently experience good fortune while others are less fortunate, attributing 'luck' to specific objects is misleading. The idea that certain individuals or objects enjoy a mystical favor is simply a fabrication within the poker community. real money .
Rather than waiting for good fortune to smile down upon us, we should focus on enhancing our poker skills. Additionally, it's beneficial to have a realistic perspective on what to expect in terms of both good and bad luck. Many players underestimate how much variance plays a role in the game. It's common for poker players to boast after performing well over a mere handful of hands, which reflects their misunderstanding that such results over small samples are heavily influenced by luck rather than skill.
Chad Holloway is a WSOP Bracelet winner from 2013 and has previously served as a managing editor and live reporter for PokerNews.