Poker takes more skill than chess prove me wrong

Remember...

Its not a game, it's a war

chess is a game of skill

poker is a game of luck

No

Roulette is a game of luck

Poker is a game of skill

You can win whether your holding cards or not

If you are not playing against a computer then chess is very much like poker.

Bluffing is just more out in the open and it all comes down to time. If you play <=5 min chess, which is a nessesity in the age of online chess with players using programs to cheat, then you find chess being a completely different game.

Ya, you could spend alot of time to figure out that a move is a bluff, but than that causes you to not have enough time to do the same for the rest of the game.

Chess can be instinctual, tactical, and silly because in the real world, the clock will run out.

Each round of a hand of poker may have a minimum clock but it's at least 1 min. During that one minute, all you have to decide is bet, check, or fold. Betting amounts are subjective but is NOT like that takes too much thought execpt.

And just like in chess, the house or players may cheat by stacking the deck. There really is no way of checking but in my state, I think the automatic card shuffling is under the table is actually stacking the deck. It's pretty obvious if you realize that you stand the most chance of winning at those tables within the first 10 mins of sitting down. Before those automatic shuffing cheating devices have time to account for the extra person at the table. It really seems like a money laudering scheem once you realize that those people that are sitting at the table with their card member registered with the dealer are getting the best hands every time.

The fact is, chess is harder than poker when there is a clock. It is harder to cheat, but using a computer to cheat doesn't decrease you chances of being able to beat the computer, only your own ability to think like the computer does. Using a computer in poker may seem usless, but over time, it would pay if time was limited.

The duration requires probability theory and an analysis of permutations.

I would say that it takes supercomputers to play chess at the grandmaster level and that there has never been a computer that can beat champion poker players. It's like apples and oranges.

You should also factor in that chess clocks significantly make solving chess problems and countermoves far more difficult.

There is a limited number of poker hands based upon a deck. There is a humongous number of chess variations like pawn promotion that has no parallel in poker without wild cards. What champion poker players would play with wild cards. They would be embarrassed to play so amateurishly.

You can teach basic concept of poker in one hand. Chess takes years to master. I learned to count cards when I was a kid so poker is easy, I can always tell what’s held after the first three cards are played.

"Knight to Bishop Six"

[*SMACK*]

"WHAT'D I TELL YOU ABOUT THAT?!"

Poker is 80% luck and 20% skill. Chess is 100% skill.

This is as ridiculous as a carpenter telling a welder that carpentry requires more skill.

[hit thumb, falls off roof]

[burns hand off, goes blind]


PAYCHECK MAKES IT ALL WORTH WHILE

Try this. Play two man teams of chess where you split the board on one side. No talking is allowed. One team plays against the other team.Use chess clocks.

It's quite difficult and blunders happen and similar to what happens on battlefields. One presumes the other understands strategy, and then horrible mistakes are made because no actual communication is occurring.

Or lowball poker

odds of getting a 7 high garbage hand that beats everything, are...

Or poker dice, odds on getting three of a kind when throwing 5 dice are...

Honestly both are memorization games. The computer uses a book, in both cases. One is a move-book, the top machines play from final K v K sorts of scenarios and then work backwardly, they software shitheads have a complete closing book of all possible chess games from 8 pieces left on the board and that's climbing, while most humans are lucky to memorize the opening book, thus machines memorize and humans analyze it. Always machine opponent has human handlers, also in hmm say "Minority Report" you can have your gifted dolphin chick lyin the water playing murder prophecy chess, haha, but she needs humans to keep her tickin.

All it would take is a thermal imaging camera, facial recognition software, and some AI code.

Good numbers but I'd say it's more like 80 skill 20 luck

However..

A good poker player makes his own luck

That's why I didn't differentiate between the two here


Two very different things altogether

Thats why poker has a different "expert" win almost everytime. The best player in the world still needs the cards and luck. An amateur on a lucky streak can win the biggest poker tournament.

"Expert" poker players only have multiple tournament wins because they play constantly and the law of averages comes into play.

To a point. At some point you are going to get called down and if you don't have the cards you lose.

Most of hold'em is mucking bad starting hands pre and post flop. It does get boring (which is why it's called "grinding").

There's no bluffing in chess, your opponent can see everything you do.

The only luck in chess is who opens.

As an old married fart, I loved playing partner card games with my wife and another married couple. That takes skill and "reading" her smiles and postures and eyes. That was delightful.

I never liked poker as it's mostly about lying.

Yep, grinding out that rent money lol

Best to win a nice pot and hit the road

Wasn't trying to be rude I really just took the numbers out of my you know where obviously. Not sure what the ratio really is. I like both poker and chess so I'm not dissing poker. I just find chess to take a lot more skill than poker does. Chess is a much deeper game having delved heavily into both games. As for which one I prefer I don't know. Depends on my mood I guess I play both a lot. As for computers they crush humans at chess because it's more involved thinking and skill wise. As for poker there's a lot more luck involved as well as bluffing. That's why the computers can overcome the humans at chess and not poker.

what a complete idiot OP is.

Even a retard can win at poker once in a while. Whereas a retard can't get past the 4th move in chess.


Sorry OP - you are so stupid you don't know you are stupid.

This is seriously a stupid stupid thread.

My answer is Monopoly is the best game of skill because it teaches us the bankers control the money and the land.

Poker is 20% luck, 80% skill.



Even a retard can win at poker, but in the long run these retards ALWAYS make a loss whereas a good player ALWAYS makes a profit.

I make a little extra with poker since more than 10 years and it's quite consistent.

More people should buy or find an open source free chess TUTOR. It has puzzles where you figure out what to do in so many moves.

Just playing chess against a computer is a terrible way to learn. Playing chess with the same player is liable to taint your playing style.

I think more young people should pay tough strategy wargames and some even have RTS elements so you can do tactics on various kinds of terrain.,

In war,morale and leadership beats numbers quite often. There are many examples in history were pure numbers didn't do squat.

Playing cards is only fun if you play for a little money. Play for a lot, and it makes you sick when you lose.

I wouldn't play chess without a clock. Some people take way too long to make a move. You don't endless amount of time when waging war.

It's cool

Playing poker online takes away a lot of the bluffing element. You've gotta watch how they bet. Online playing makes you develop a 6th sense of some kind to judge hands.. It's strange really, then when you play at the tables it Seems easier;)