# Thread: Which type are the best cards players...

1. So they all say.
A truly good player does not lose.

Dick was good.. if he saw his chances nil he left the table.. you are not tied to the chair exactly you know.

And he became the President.
In Casablanca he also knew when to quit.

2. Originally Posted by wildcat
The good player knows when to quit.
Oh no... I can't stop it... here it comes...

You got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
Know when to run

3. Originally Posted by INTJMom
Oh no... I can't stop it... here it comes...

You got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
Know when to run
Dick did not run.
A helicopter fetched him from Casablanca.

But I think it amounts to the same thing.

4. Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser
Perhaps I am merely fooling myself, but I think having a working knowledge of probability is a significant advantage in poker. For example if I have two hearts and the flop shows 2 hearts and a club, then I know to get a flush on one draw I have a 9/47 probability, which is approximately 20%. If there are two draws remaining then I know my chance of a flush is approximately 40%. I know the true odds are actually a bit less than that, but it gives me a good idea of what kind of odds I'm up against if I'm betting on a flush.

Also knowledge of probability can help a lot in developing principals as you learn to play. For example, even though a flush beats a straight, the chance of getting a flush on a flush draw is higher than the change of making a straight on a straight draw (even more so on an inside straight draw). Thinking about these sorts of things beforehand can help you work out good principals for play.
Yes. There are some situations that are clear like that (though you may have actually underestimated the odds of the two draw case), and having some knowledge of probability is better than saying "I feel it". As for principles of play, that seems like something to be worked out before you come to the table, not when you are already there.

I have a stats major friend who claims to play strictly by the odds but has lost every time we've played (Not necessarily because people are stealing his blinds or because he is getting bluffed--I think he calculates the odds wrong).

If he had worked out the odds ahead of time, and had a way of remembering them in particular situations, that would be a different thing.

But he was trying to estimate on-the-fly (for every hand), and failing miserably. That seems like hubris.

If he had a system of counting outs, etc. that would be different also. But he thought, somehow, having graduated with an M.S. in statistics automatically gave him amazing calculating prowess. I don't believe he played poker that much more often than I did, so his calculations needed to be fast and accurate w/ no check against experience.

I prefer the observed long-run frequency method (since I haven't worked out the odds ahead of time, it was a spur of the moment decision to play). Using observed frequency has the added benefit of automatically pulling in the playing styles of players at the table. By this, I mean observing what types of hands are winning (keeping track) and who at the table is winning that way and how often (again keeping track). Not a fool-proof system by any means, and you have to play extremely tight early on, but it has had an amazing way at working in many situations where I don't know the theoretical odds.

Of course, who is at the table has to be stable. I told my sister to taking our winnings and head to bed when people decided to change where they sat after we were winning all night. (The observations would be less valid then).

5. I win a lot... and I am not even competitive. I can usually tell when someone's bluffing.

6. Originally Posted by ygolo
Yes. There are some situations that are clear like that (though you may have actually underestimated the odds of the two draw case), and having some knowledge of probability is better than saying "I feel it". As for principles of play, that seems like something to be worked out before you come to the table, not when you are already there.

I have a stats major friend who claims to play strictly by the odds but has lost every time we've played (Not necessarily because people are stealing his blinds or because he is getting bluffed--I think he calculates the odds wrong).

If he had worked out the odds ahead of time, and had a way of remembering them in particular situations, that would be a different thing.

But he was trying to estimate on-the-fly (for every hand), and failing miserably. That seems like hubris.

If he had a system of counting outs, etc. that would be different also. But he thought, somehow, having graduated with an M.S. in statistics automatically gave him amazing calculating prowess. I don't believe he played poker that much more often than I did, so his calculations needed to be fast and accurate w/ no check against experience.

I prefer the observed long-run frequency method (since I haven't worked out the odds ahead of time, it was a spur of the moment decision to play). Using observed frequency has the added benefit of automatically pulling in the playing styles of players at the table. By this, I mean observing what types of hands are winning (keeping track) and who at the table is winning that way and how often (again keeping track). Not a fool-proof system by any means, and you have to play extremely tight early on, but it has had an amazing way at working in many situations where I don't know the theoretical odds.

Of course, who is at the table has to be stable. I told my sister to taking our winnings and head to bed when people decided to change where they sat after we were winning all night. (The observations would be less valid then).
I think your friend is a bit dillusional about his ability to calculate odds. However the main advantage of probability is against opponents that you are not used to. The most important skill in poker is to learn how to play specifically against the other people you are playing with. This is far more important than probability even if you do have the brain equivalent of a calculator. Probility is there to give you an advantage against opponents that you are not familiar with.

7. Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser
I think your friend is a bit dillusional about his ability to calculate odds. However the main advantage of probability is against opponents that you are not used to. The most important skill in poker is to learn how to play specifically against the other people you are playing with. This is far more important than probability even if you do have the brain equivalent of a calculator. Probility is there to give you an advantage against opponents that you are not familiar with.
I can see that. If some people are clearly being silly, I will take their money.

8. Almost all of this thread is about poker. Interesting. I am a bridgeplayer, and the skills needed there are not the very same as in poker. Yes, there is also statistics, memory and calculation, but what I like a lot in bridge is the communication and convention part of it.
I find it very hard to think of a "typical bridgplayer's type". Any ideas on that?

9. Originally Posted by mippus
Almost all of this thread is about poker. Interesting. I am a bridgeplayer, and the skills needed there are not the very same as in poker. Yes, there is also statistics, memory and calculation, but what I like a lot in bridge is the communication and convention part of it.
I find it very hard to think of a "typical bridgplayer's type". Any ideas on that?
The best bridge player I've known was an INTP. He was known to be the best player in my city and is often paid money to be someone's partner. He was a math professor where I worked.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO