Oh man, I'm so confused:(

[rsh01]

... I think you got my point

its hard to when you're changing your statements

The outcome of each individual hand/trade is very much dependent on luck

i will use 'very much', not 'completely'....the outcome of the cards dealt in a hand of poker (any card game) is entirely dependent on luck - just like it is with flipping a coin - but you're talking about the outcome of the hand i.e. who wins it....which has v little to do with luck - good or bad.


daniel negraneau once mentioned that he could beat a group of crap poker players playing blind. he is removing the element of luck from his play - the cards, to level the playing field a little, and using his skill, experience etc to define the outcome. i agree - he will lose some hands, and i agree this could be down to bad luck.... it could also be down to a good bit of skill from a newbie who happens to be good at arithmetic, has just read harringtons books & took a course on body language / the art of deception. whatever - the outcome of each hand is very much dependent on a few factors, more often than not, in this hypothetical example it would be on negraneau's skill. it would be an interesting experiment.

 

[karoshiman]

... you're talking about the outcome of the hand i.e. who wins it....which has v little to do with luck - good or bad.

Let's assume the following situation in Texas Hold'em.

2 players are in a hand, Negreanu (just as you mentioned him) and a weaker player.

It's after the turn. Negreanu has a straight and is first to act. He puts his opponent on a set. And he "knows" that his opponent will call any bet. Hence, he goes all-in as he wins 77% of the time in this situation.

His opponent calls and hits one of his 10 outs, i.e. he still won although he had only a winning chance of 23%.

So, you still say that the outcome of ONE INDIVIDUAL (!) hand has very little to do with luck??

I don't know how much you have played poker or what your trading experience is, but drawdowns (or downswings as the call it in poker) can occur for veeeery loooong periods although you do everything correctly...

 

[Shakone]

The outcome of any hand is a mixture of luck and skill. Why is this even being debated?

 

[Masquerade]

Hi Masquerade,

Why do you think that is? And where do you got that info from?

Poker and trading have many similarities, but also some distinctions.

I've played poker for some time very intensely and often with pro players. I consider myself a good player. But I've realized that I got into poker 5 years too late. Poker has become so popular and the education material so good nowadays, that one has only a little edge over other players (if any... of course, dependent on with whom you play).

In Trading on the other hand, the edge can be a lot bigger (dependent on your methodology).

The following is not referring to you, Masquerade...

For all those folks out there who say that Poker and Trading are different or compare it with gambling in general, you either don't understand Poker or you don't understand Trading.

Both are games of skill with a strong element of luck involved. The outcome of each individual hand/trade is very much dependent on luck. However, over the course of many hands/trades the good player/trader wins.

I put Black Jack (if you can count the cards) and Backgammon into the same category. But the average edge here is even smaller than in poker I would say.

However, you cannot compare Trading with Roulette or the Slots, as it is impossible to have an edge here.

So, you have to distinguish, if you talk about "gambling"...

And if it is of interest to you, I am a profitable trader.

Regards,
k

Long post and I don't really have the time to address it all.

I'm fairly active in both poker / trading communities. I see many poker players try their hand at trading and it just doesn't work out. One big reason is they have no edge because they don't know anything. The foundations for trading just aren't there and they have an inability to grasp the information. Trading is a far more complex game than poker. The only real variable in poker one has to be concerned with is variance and whether you get the luck in your favour. After that, it's just you vs the known entities and one would assume there is an edge (or an edge can be obtained) otherwise you wouldn't be sitting at the table!

The comparison between trading / poker is highly exaggerated. The similarities are scarce and are mainly based to do with the psychology of dealing with losses and waiting for a good hand/trade and making the most out of it. After that, the rest is out of the window.

Regarding the edge in poker: the games are tougher. BUT there are people winning on a consistent basis. I see people winning 6 figs / month consistently so the games are beatable. It's just a case of you a) getting better and (b) finding weaker players to play against. Many people struggle with (a) due to their ego / laziness.

Poker is gambling though, at least in the very short term. If you play a session of 1,000 hands you can put your money in as a statistical favourite and lose every time. Betting on a coin which is 70% is still a gamble by definition. I'll grant you it's a smart gamble and one you should always bet on. But over one flip of the coin, you're certainly gambling.

Not sure why you brought backgammon into this. It's very similar to poker, there is an element of skill and luck. As with poker, over the long run, the player with an edge will come out on top. Over one trial anything can happen. I think people really overestimate their edge over the market and how they can have an x% edge on a market whilst institutions struggle to do it themselves. Also the nature of the market means that odds are impossible to quantify, unlike poker, backgammon etc. It's certainly a lot more dangerous game than sitting at a poker table and knowing what odds you play with, or at the very least being able to determine what sort of odds you will receive.

 

[karoshiman]

...

I think people really overestimate their edge over the market and how they can have an x% edge on a market whilst institutions struggle to do it themselves. Also the nature of the market means that odds are impossible to quantify, unlike poker, backgammon etc.

...

Thanks for your reply.

I'd like to add the following.

The similarities of the mentioned games with trading are due to their basic element of betting on uncertain outcomes combined with the fact that an edge can be achieved (the extent of the possible edge differs, of course).

I'm of the same opinion that trading is far more complex. The reason for that is, in contrast to poker, backgammon or black jack, the rules of the game in trading (i.e. the trading method(s) leading to profitability) are not clear. Not only that... everyone has to find their own rules, as every trader has a different personality and, hence, has to use a method which suits his or her personality.

It's very unlikely that you buy a few books about trading and you start to make money... but it's certainly possible with the mentioned games, also, as you can choose your opponents. In trading you are playing mostly against professionals...


Regarding this:

...

Not sure why you brought backgammon into this.

...

Well... because I play it a lot ... more than poker nowadays.

Thanks again.

Regards,
k

 

[Masquerade]

One thing which adds to the complexity of trading is the unexpected. You can hope that you end up on the good side of these events or that your stop gets hit. But the truth is you can end up on the bad side and you might get slipped big time. It's not even events you can account for, eg. Tsunamis, terrorist attack, leaked report about a major company fudging the books, natural disasters and other such things.

That's not something you have to deal with in poker. Not to mention that you're trading against machines and some of the "brightest" brains. So for the average person they're up against it.

Backgammon's an interesting game, i'd like to learn it but just one of those things I haven't done. There's some big money floating around in the backgammon scene....

 

[karoshiman]

One thing which adds to the complexity of trading is the unexpected. You can hope that you end up on the good side of these events or that your stop gets hit. But the truth is you can end up on the bad side and you might get slipped big time. It's not even events you can account for, eg. Tsunamis, terrorist attack, leaked report about a major company fudging the books, natural disasters and other such things.

That's not something you have to deal with in poker. Not to mention that you're trading against machines and some of the "brightest" brains. So for the average person they're up against it.

Backgammon's an interesting game, i'd like to learn it but just one of those things I haven't done. There's some big money floating around in the backgammon scene....

That's right.

Some professional poker players are also involved in the BG scene, the most famous one of course being Gus Hansen.

What I like about the game is that you can quickly squeeze a game into your schedule, as the casual matches usually don't take very long (in contrast to poker where you have to play a little bit in order to be able to assess the game of your opponents). The rules of the game are also quite easy. Unlike poker I haven't read any book on the game (would like to... no time) but learned it from playing against better players (not for money, of course ).

 

[Masquerade]

Yes, Gus was playing a €25k poker tournament in monaco and ended up playing some russian billionaire in a hotel lobby instead of the tournament and won €2m playing Backgammon. The good thing about Backgammon is it's big in the middle east, they don't gamble on cards and play Backgammon for large money. Not huge, but I know of a trader who played some arab in London for £500/pt on Backgammon. It's just all very alien to me, need to play with some people and figure out how it all works.

 

[Atilla]

The outcome of any hand is a mixture of luck and skill. Why is this even being debated?

Talk about sitting on the fence

The outcome of any hand is a statistical probability. The skill is playing the probabilities and avoiding luck altogether.

 

[Masquerade]

You can't avoid luck. All you can do is play large samples to try reduce the significance of it. In theory you should run closer to expectation, but there's no certainty that you would.

 

[Atilla]

You can't avoid luck. All you can do is play large samples to try reduce the significance of it. In theory you should run closer to expectation, but there's no certainty that you would.

Luck is a pigment of ones imagination.

There is no such thing as luck. Man's creation like the number zero or GOD. Simply a matter of fact that none of them really exist.

 

[rsh01]

The comparison between trading / poker is highly exaggerated. The similarities are scarce and are mainly based to do with the psychology of dealing with losses and waiting for a good hand/trade and making the most out of it. After that, the rest is out of the window.

agree with your post, its a very lazy comparison imo.

 

[Masquerade]

Luck is a pigment of your imagination.

There is no such thing as luck. Man's creation like the number zero or GOD. Simply a matter of fact that none of them really exist.

Luck / statistical improbability. However you like to call it....

ps. there is a god. He brings me good luck.

 

[Atilla]

Luck / statistical improbability. However you like to call it....

Useful in fiction I guess.

Important not to be confused with or attributed to skill.

 

[karoshiman]

Yes, Gus was playing a €25k poker tournament in monaco and ended up playing some russian billionaire in a hotel lobby instead of the tournament and won €2m playing Backgammon. The good thing about Backgammon is it's big in the middle east, they don't gamble on cards and play Backgammon for large money. Not huge, but I know of a trader who played some arab in London for £500/pt on Backgammon. It's just all very alien to me, need to play with some people and figure out how it all works.

Yeah, I've heard this story with GH

 

[Shakone]

Talk about sitting on the fence

The outcome of any hand is a statistical probability. The skill is playing the probabilities and avoiding luck altogether.

Don't really agree with this. Given initial cards, and say even the flop, there is a probability given this info of you winning, but by bluffing, pressing, causing others to fold, you actually change that probability, hence a mixture of luck/probability and skill. It's not that the outcome is simply an unchanging statistical probability, nor that this can't be affected by skilful play.

As for luck being a part. If I get two aces, and then another two aces on the flop, it doesn't really matter who I'm playing against, the best player in the world or not, I'm not going to fold and I stand a very high chance of winning that hand. So luck is there, adn in this case very powerful. The skill part even in this, is trying to gain the maximum payoff for this hand. So it's a mixture.

 

[Splitlink]

You cannot avoid luck but it has to be earned to be successful.. Another name for luck is opportunity and it has to be recognised for its potential, otherwise it will pass you by. I don't think that any business works without it ,and this one is, certainly, no exception.

 

[Enzzo]

You cannot avoid luck but it has to be earned to be successful.. Another name for luck is opportunity and it has to be recognised for its potential, otherwise it will pass you by. I don't think that any business works without it ,and this one is, certainly, no exception.

Luck is one of the factors in trading, poker, etc.... as is in all life aspects....
but imho "our job", should be minimize as much as possible its effect... for good or for bad

 

[Atilla]

Luck is one of the factors in trading, poker, etc.... as is in all life aspects....
but imho "our job", should be minimize as much as possible its effect... for good or for bad

Luck is the lazy non thinking man's brief explanations to aspects of life...

 

[Splitlink]

Luck is one of the factors in trading, poker, etc.... as is in all life aspects....
but imho "our job", should be minimize as much as possible its effect... for good or for bad

It is very difficult. This afternoon I went shopping and came back to find my trade making 14 points. I did something else and then, without thinking, just fat fingers, I pressed the close button. As soon as I did it I cursed myself but, guess what? The market started to drift lower and, in the end, it had been the right thing to do.

Luck and I did not deserve it!