Can someone explain this please ?

[poker777778]

To all here who have openly stated at this noticeboard that "Tournaments are just mainly "luck" and not so much "skill" !!:....please suggest your reasoning as to why the MAJORITY of the money winners at this years Main Event were :1. Non Aussies 2. Players who had multiple experience in these FIVE long day pressure cooker events at 10k a pop - and NOT once a year satellite winners - who have a penchant for getting "lucky".I am very interested in all of your supporting arguments in this matter.

[Malys]

I am of the opinion that both play an important part in tourney play. In ring games, skill is the major deciding factor, blinds don't eat away at your stack. You have more time to observe your opponents, you don't have to worry about being shifted tables as the numbers are dwindling away. Plus their is no real reward in taking a risk on a hand. if you lose all your money it is just that you have lost all your money. In tournament play, skill and luck counterbalance each other. You do need a bit of luck to win a few coinflip situations, and you also need the skill to be able to extract maximum value from the certain hands, and the skill to be able to get away from a hand. I think with a lot of the internationals taking away the big prizes is that they have a lot of experience playing in the 5 day 10k tournaments ala wpt, wsop and ept. And others that i can't name. With that experience comes the skill that improves their play. and hence gives them better results. Best way would be a sport analogy. If you were playing in your local cricket comp in D grade. Then were moved up and played for australia for a season. Even if you were the 12th man. The experience that you got, by observing and training with the squad would help your game. Now you go back to your d grade comp, and all of a sudden you are kicking butt. Now that it just my thoughts on it. I in no way profess to be a poker player, i am still learning after 3 years. My game has changed the last year though with more knowledge and understanding of certain facets.

[JoeyDel]

This: 1. (used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as present, near, just mentioned or pointed out, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis): This is my coat. Please: 1. (used as a polite addition to requests, commands, etc.) if you would be so obliging; kindly: Please come here. Will you please turn the radio off? If I can explain anything else to you let me know!P.S on a more serious note I agree with you that luck is not the main factor in winning a big tournament (although I will not say that it has zero to do with winning).In my opinion being able to play 12hours a day for 5 days straight is an amazing achievement in itself.

[mattp]

Setting up a strawman and knocking him down. Must be an election coming up.

[JK.]

777778,I will answer your question"why did more experienced players do well in this years' Aussie Millions?",when you explain to me how poker novices,Moneymaker,Hachem,Gold and Raymer won the last four World Series in Las Vegas.And please don't try to convince me that any of these four were good players when they won.Couple of them have improved out of sight since but when they initially won the big one they were very ordinary and inexperienced players.

[Chambers]

tournaments involve alot of luck. in my opinion this comes down to recognising your edge and taking that edge in as many situations as possible. In a tourney you've only got one life and then it's over. It's not about 'getting lucky', its about taking your edge and hoping that it holds up when it mathematically should.The reason you see pro's and people who are 'professional' tourney players taking these things down is because they take EVERY advantage they can get. Gus will play 44 for all his chips vs anyone he suspects has a high ace or two unpaired overcards..why? because he tries to maximise his edge. Of course it involves getting lucky (ie Hachem surviving 21 all ins at this years Aussie Millions ME), but in the majority of these hands, Hachem saw an oppurtunity to grow his stack and take it to another level- it's killer instinct that people like negrenaeu and mizrachi and ivey all boast about in their tournament resumes.JK we could use your argument for cash games too. If jamie gold goes on High stakes poker and takes 250 000 from doyle brunson over a 5 game stretch.. does that make him a better play than doyle?Tournaments require MORE LUCK to go deep, because of the mine field of players, but they certainly don't require 'less skill', it's just a different form of skill. It's the skill that hellmuth has that todd brunson doesnt have for tourneys, and vica versa for cash games.JK is right that over the long run it is probable that winning cash game players will end up with a higher profitability than tourney players, but the comparison isn't fair because they are two different games.I'd like to hear Mark Vos' opinion on this because he is profitable at both and could explain from a proffessional's point of view.

[WannaPlayPoker]

JK i think you got to look at the number of entrants in the WSOP compared to Aussie millions ME..Out of 700 ppl im sure there would b like 10% that are crap players so really only 70 people could get lucky...Then your comparing to a tourny that has over 8000 ppl playin in so im sure the 800 of them one of them can win..Heres an example..Say in a horse race..You have 10 starters...8 are top runners 2 are so so..You pretty much going to get one of the top 8 horses winning all the time...But say you have a race with 24 horses and say 12 are top horses....then theres alot more horses than can interfere with the running and chances of a top horse...I dunno if it makes sense but you gotta look at it relative to the size.I would love to know the %of pros that played in both these events(relative) and im sure that it was more in the millions

[Trent]

To all here who have openly stated at this noticeboard that "Tournaments are just mainly "luck" and not so much "skill" !!:I think JK is the only one that falls into this category. So its going to be JK vs PNW.I think a heads-up match between JK and a chosen PNW champion will be an easier way to decide the winner of this argument. We could do it in a tournament format on the new Crown Poker Pro tables.Trent.

[Brian McDonald]

JK has agreed to this challenge on the condition that somebody at Crown posts on PNW what the rakes are on this Poker Pro machine.He has stated that 'he is probably a favourite, but doesn't want to get ripped off with the commission'.Would the person chosen to be the opponent please deposit US$2,000 into JK's Poker Stars account to cover airfare and an additional US$5000 for accomodation and entrance to Spearmint Rhino.Please inform us as soon as possible who the victim, err opponent will be.P.S. please make it joethenuts5119th or dang20

[yoyo]

I'd like to hear Mark Vos' opinion on this because he is profitable at bothnot if you believe sharkscope