|
I had a very perplexing and heated debate with a poker pro a few weeks ago about the skill vs. luck argument in poker. The gist of the debate had to do with my assertion that poker is a game of skill. I know – it sounds weird that skill vs. luck would cause debate with another pro. Certainly, the general public might argue the point with me. But a poker pro?
The pro basically asserted the following: Yes, for winning players, poker is a game of skill, because they are good at determining their mathematical expectation and, this, are playing with an edge. But most people are losing players. There are always people on the losing end of the transaction and those people are not playing a skill game, but are playing to get lucky, a negative expectation.
On the surface, his argument might seem compelling. Sure, someone playing at a negative expectation might be trying to overcome that expectation and win anyway. He rates to lose and is trying to thwart his EV. That I agree with. What I don’t agree with is that, for those playing poker at a negative expected value, poker is a luck game. Frankly, it is absurd to believe that only poker pros are playing a game of skill.
Take golf, for example. Everyone can agree that golf is a game of skill with specific skill elements that we can identify, like putting and driving. As well, we can all agree that a player like Tiger Woods applies those skill elements very adeptly. Now what about a golfer who shoots a 120? Clearly, that golfer applies the skill elements very poorly: he putts and drives without skill. If we pit Tiger against this bad golfer, Tiger would win every time.
Here is the question I have for you: Is the game of golf itself more of a game of skill when Tiger is playing it than when the 120 handicap golfer is playing it? The question sounds completely absurd when I ask it about golf. Of course golf is a game of skill, regardless of whether someone applies those skill elements well or poorly. The quality of the player has no bearing whatsoever on the absolute fact that the game is one of skill.
What is interesting is that while that logic is so completely transparent to people when it comes to a game like golf or football or baseball or bridge, it is not as clear when considering a game like poker — and I believe that is because wagering is involved. But think about it: The logic is exactly the same. We can all agree that there are skill elements in poker, like whether you bet, fold, or raise at any given decision point; or how much you bet or raise if you make those decisions. These are elements of skill and how well a player executes these skill elements determines the likelihood of winning or losing. As in golf, we can all agree that the top players — players like Erik Seidel and Phil Hellmuth — apply these skill elements very adeptly.
But what about a player new to the game? Obviously a new player would apply these skill elements poorly, just as the 120 golfer putts poorly. And Just as with golf, the fact that a new player applies these skill elements poorly has no bearing whatsoever on the absolute fact that poker is a game of skill. A player who is a poor decision maker at the table is, to be sure, executing the skill elements of the game of poker very poorly; but even when a bad player is playing the game, he is still playing a game of skill. He is just not playing it well.
So a poker player can be playing at a negative expectation and still be playing a game of skill. That there are bad players in the world actually reinforces the argument that poker is a game of skill in this sense: In a game of pure luck, like Baccarat, a player cannot be bad or good. The only decision in that game is whether to be player or bank and both decisions have the same expectation. So one player cannot be worse than another, since the only decision in the game that affects the outcome is neutral to the player’s expectation. In a skill game like poker, on the other hand, one player can be worse than another because there are skill elements and multiple decision points that do have a direct effect on a player’s expectation.
In a pure luck game like Baccarat or the lottery, no player can be worse than any other. Only in games of skill can there be even a tangible difference between players. Poker is one of those games.
|
