Live data from Hacker News

The Science of Winning Poker

online.wsj.com

41–44 of 44 posts

Re: The Science of Winning Poker

#41
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not? It demonstrates the ability to hold a huge amount of information in your head at once, make rapid decisions in a high pressure environment, and do what are essentially Bayesian probability calculations in your head. I may be biased as someone that played poker to put myself through grad school and had a nice hourly rate by the end of it, but I think that it requires a high intelligence, the ability to emotio…

Are you still a winning player? Were you playing before Black Friday? I heard it was easier. I studied the game a lot these past few months and I barely break even. I'm only winning in live poker.

Not sure...there is a dearth of games now for US players and I was so disgusted with my money getting wrapped up in the Full Tilt BS that I went away from poker for about a year. I am certainly still a winning player at live poker, but the hourly rate can be a bit dismal and I don't enjoy it enough to do it everyday, or even once a week.

I would say that by 2008 the average live game was strong enough that I definitely had to practice disciplined game/seat selection, couldn't just sit down anywhere and expect my edge was higher than the rake.

I agree HU strategies advanced exponentially once stoxpoker and some other video sites came on and people started being heads-up specialists.

Re: The Science of Winning Poker

#42
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you still a winning player? Were you playing before Black Friday? I heard it was easier. I studied the game a lot these past few months and I barely break even. I'm only winning in live poker.

Not sure...there is a dearth of games now for US players and I was so disgusted with my money getting wrapped up in the Full Tilt BS that I went away from poker for about a year. I am certainly still a winning player at live poker, but the hourly rate can be a bit dismal and I don't enjoy it enough to do it everyday, or even once a week. I would say that by 2008 the average live game was strong enough that I definite…

I'm hoping the US players can come back online soon. I'm not saying US players are bad but it can't be harder than playing Russians hyper-LAGs all day.

Re: The Science of Winning Poker

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/

Been reading 2p2 for 10 years and was a mod at one point. I would say its about 500000x more valuable than reddit poker.

That would've been my initial assessment too, but I've never read reddit poker, so I didn't feel qualified to compare the two...

Re: The Science of Winning Poker

#44
post #7

>A few years ago, a young pro named Phil Galfond published a crucial refinement to Mr. Sklansky's point. He showed that the right way to analyze a poker decision is to consider your opponent's "range"—that is, the full set of different hands that he could plausibly have, given all the actions that he has thus far taken. I find it impossible to believe that concept of a "range" was (a) invented a few years ago and (b)…

I have a theorem which I refer to as the Fuzzwah theory, it goes like this: "The more you know about a topic, the more it will annoy you when it is covered by the main stream media." Once you realize this with regards to topics you're knowledgeable about you start taking coverage of ALL topics with a grain of salt, knowing that someone who knows all about it is probably cringing and / or yelling at how poorly it is b…

The Fuzzwah theory sounds like a variation (perhaps corollary) of the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect
Post reply on HN