Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

thehobbyist.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#51

Post by afc »

jjxw wrote: post #40
woah wrote: post #30

> Once you have identified an activity as being more luck than skill driven, a person’s process for the activity starts to become a much stronger signal for whether or not they are actually any good. This is the central point of the article, and I don't think it's true. If it were as easy as "following a good process", then anyone could get rich investing.

This is a point worth clarifying. I think a lot of people actually do get rich investing. It just turns out the "good process" in this case is leaving your money in a diversified portfolio for decades. This leverages making a bunch of bets that on average have a positive expected value over a long enough time horizon that you are able to realize the gains. There are also certainly other ways to have an edge in invest…

> I think a lot of people actually do get rich investing.

https://youtu.be/H5jPJQ5cVGU?si=KoXd4H3FOkLZ1y06 has an interesting counter-point. You need to fuel your returns with savings.

I guess it's a subtlety — in the end, since you said "for decades", and if you adjusted your wording sightly (such as "help you reach your financial goals", instead of "get rich"), the underlying message is similar. But I figured I'd share the link in case you find it interesting.

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#52

Post by canistel »

1. This has many parallels with the concept of Resulting - our tendency to equate the quality of a decision with the quality of its outcome, which was conceptualised in the book Thinking in Bets by Annie Duke, which although a great work, I have to admit I did not finish.

2. Even though the element of chance is inherent to Bridge too, Duplicate Bridge is a clever attempt to nullify the role of luck in tournaments. The same hand is played in different tables (by different teams), and points are scored depending on how you fared in comparison to the other table. So, rather than playing to win, you play to do better than your counterpart in the other table. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplicate_bridge

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#53

Post by jjxw »

afc wrote: post #51
jjxw wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a point worth clarifying. I think a lot of people actually do get rich investing. It just turns out the "good process" in this case is leaving your money in a diversified portfolio for decades. This leverages making a bunch of bets that on average have a positive expected value over a long enough time horizon that you are able to realize the gains. There are also certainly other ways to have an edge in invest…

> I think a lot of people actually do get rich investing. https://youtu.be/H5jPJQ5cVGU?si=KoXd4H3FOkLZ1y06 has an interesting counter-point. You need to fuel your returns with savings. I guess it's a subtlety — in the end, since you said "for decades", and if you adjusted your wording sightly (such as "help you reach your financial goals", instead of "get rich"), the underlying message is similar. But I figured I'd s…

Yeah, agreed, love the Plain Bagel and the generally sane takes from that channel.

"Get rich" is definitely too broad of a target and probably has too many connotations with "mansion and luxury cars" when, as you identified, what I meant with that statement is closer to "financial goals" or, more tangibly, something like "comfortable retirement".

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#54

Post by pverghese »

brigadier132 wrote: post #11
_gmax0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate on how the real economy is positive sum and poker is negative sum?

Poker has a rake and the amount of wealth in the system is the money people put on the table (not even factoring in that gambling winnings are taxed). Meaning the total wealth decreases for every hand played in a raked game. Economic transactions and increasing efficiency are positive sum. You can combine pieces of metal into new alloys and machinery which are more valuable than the sum of their parts. This is positi…

Taxes are the rake in the economy.

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#55

Post by psd1 »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #13
brigadier132 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poker has a rake and the amount of wealth in the system is the money people put on the table (not even factoring in that gambling winnings are taxed). Meaning the total wealth decreases for every hand played in a raked game. Economic transactions and increasing efficiency are positive sum. You can combine pieces of metal into new alloys and machinery which are more valuable than the sum of their parts. This is positi…

What do you think two poker players still in a hand raising each other are doing? They both still think it’s mutually beneficial. The maths if you have full visibility show it isn’t, but I’d argue that’s the same of the “real” economy too. In the latter example we can point to long-standing increasing income and wealth inequality as a proxy for the house rake at poker.

When is down to two, it's zero-sum.

Income inequality does not imply zero-sum.

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#56

Post by jstanley »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #13
brigadier132 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poker has a rake and the amount of wealth in the system is the money people put on the table (not even factoring in that gambling winnings are taxed). Meaning the total wealth decreases for every hand played in a raked game. Economic transactions and increasing efficiency are positive sum. You can combine pieces of metal into new alloys and machinery which are more valuable than the sum of their parts. This is positi…

What do you think two poker players still in a hand raising each other are doing? They both still think it’s mutually beneficial. The maths if you have full visibility show it isn’t, but I’d argue that’s the same of the “real” economy too. In the latter example we can point to long-standing increasing income and wealth inequality as a proxy for the house rake at poker.

If you think the economy is zero-sum how do you explain that there is plainly more wealth now than there was 200 years ago?

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#57

Post by maest »

pverghese wrote: post #54
brigadier132 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poker has a rake and the amount of wealth in the system is the money people put on the table (not even factoring in that gambling winnings are taxed). Meaning the total wealth decreases for every hand played in a raked game. Economic transactions and increasing efficiency are positive sum. You can combine pieces of metal into new alloys and machinery which are more valuable than the sum of their parts. This is positi…

Taxes are the rake in the economy.

And yet, the total wealth goes up over time.

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#58

Post by markus_zhang »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #44
ryandrake wrote: post #6

His section on volume rings pretty true. I used to play a lot recreationally. And by "a lot" I mean probably on the medium-to-high side of recreational, but not even close to pro. Like attending every major regional event and attending WSOP every year for 10 years. Both cash and tournaments. I've stopped because of how much of a tiring grind poker is, and how much time you have to dedicate in order to make it financi…

Volume is incredibly important for any truly serious endeavor. Bryan Caplan's excellent post Do Ten Times As Much makes the point succinctly. [1] I've come to believe the real reason people shouldn't pursue these kinds of sports or games professionally unless they're born with a deep thirst for winning them is twofold. First, if you love it from day one, the chances that you're actually better than average are higher…

I particularly agree with the second point. Having enough hours is absolutely necessary to grow into a pro. And the number of hours spent is a non linear function, in two perspectives, from my observation:

First, spending 10 1-hour session produces way less pro-ness than spending 1 10-hour session. Every programmer who attempts a difficult (pro) project can probably attest to this.

Second, not all X hours/days produce the same pro-ness. People have plateaus that seem to stuck somewhere. But you need those plateau X hours/days too. I have a theory that one can avoid as much plateau as possible by always challenging oneself with an almost impossible -- yet still doable project. But it's difficult to get right, so a lot of people get a very long plateau, or burnout, and then quit.

PS: So eventually, anyone who is serious about a career must spend his hours efficiently on high quality (aligned to the career path, while challenging, but not impossible) projects.

PS2: The freedom to spend one's time is absolutely important. Marriage and children could bring havoc to this freedom so people should think carefully before treading into the water.

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#59

Post by dambi0 »

WalterBright wrote: post #49
interroboink wrote: post #21

This is an important topic to me, and I'm glad to see one of the "winners" state plainly how much luck is involved in poker, and by analogy, many other areas of life. I'd love to see articles like this written by someone who did not win, too. It's too bad that people pay less attention to those stories, as he mentioned in the article (c.f. clickbaity title). At least this is a winner admitting the importance of luck,…

> admitting the importance of luck Poker is a mathematical game with mathematically fixed odds. Real life is different in that there is a considerable amount of room to tilt the odds in one's favor. For an obvious way to tilt odds in your favor, stay in school and learn what you're being taught.

What courses / subjects would you recommend?

Re: Reflections on Luck and Skill from the Part Time Poker Grind

#60

Post by markus_zhang »

ryandrake wrote: post #26
keyle wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your candid report. Not enough people tell it how it is, and everyone thinks they're special. Fact is, a lot of top players also have deals on the side, with brands and ambassador things. I feel you need those deals to make up for the bad runs. I love the game, but the variance can inflate egos and the grind makes other hobbies more attractive.

> Thanks for your candid report. Not enough people tell it how it is, and everyone thinks they're special. That's a good point, too, one I failed to mention. A lot of people are losing poker players, but they don't know it. They don't keep records, and they don't manage and analyze their bankroll over time. A losing poker player has a negative EV. If you buy in to 20 $1000 tournaments, bink one of them for $15K, you'…

Yeah. It's difficult to keep track, especially in cash games. But to be pro is to treat it as a business. I completely agree.
Post reply on HN