HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Don Taylor goes off on poker, on air... LOL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2009, 01:00 PM
  #76
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBell84 View Post
Under no circumstances will I agree with you that the TDF is easier to win than the WSOP, regardless of all the voodoo twisted logic you throw around. The very fact that damn near no one in the world has a "chance of beating Lance Armstrong," but anyone with poker sense can ride the waves to the final table of the WSOP, by your own admission, is counter to your entire argument.

and why are we disregarding the physical accomplishment of winning the TDF? That is the ENTIRE purpose of it, after all.
Your right, that is the whole purpose of it all. It is a competition against a group of athletes to see who can finish a physical task first. Whether its a bike trip around France, a race to 100 meters, or a competition to see who can acquire all of the chips. What does it matter what the competition is based around? As long as it is based around a skill then it doesn't really matter to me what it is. And I think that the fact that it is a mental skill and not a physical skill makes it that much more impressive because really anyone with a little bit of math smarts can study the game of poker and become relatively good at it. A large majority of the people in the world could train their entire life and never be able to compete at the level of the TDF.

The debate is that it is one of the toughest prizes to win in "sport". That doesn't really suggest that the task you need to accomplish is the toughest.

I'm not sure what they are, but look at the odds next time for the TDF, and for the WSOP. Look at whoever is the favorite to win and tell me who has better odds to win. If the WSOP is easier to win then the TDF, then the Odds of the top rated player in the WSOP will be greater than the the odds of the top rated cyclist at the TDF.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 01:07 PM
  #77
Perfect_Drug
Registered User
 
Perfect_Drug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,103
vCash: 500
In korea, Starcraft is considered an E-sport. They win purses of over $500,000 for that game.

To me, poker is every bit as much of a sport as Starcraft is.

Perfect_Drug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 01:17 PM
  #78
bzur
Registered User
 
bzur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eytinge View Post
Toughest prize in sport? Is he joking?
Yeah, this is what caught me... Sure the pool of people may be bigger, so your odds, and the amount of people you need to go through are pretty rough, but you could apply that to anything... frick... the lottery is a grueling sport, buying tickets week after week for years and years... the mental fatigue must just tear people apart!

bzur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 01:25 PM
  #79
MrOiler
Registered User
 
MrOiler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,463
vCash: 500
I agree that poker isn't a sport, but a multi-day tournament is gruelling. However, Don Taylor is an ass who wants to argue about anything. That's what I took away from this clip.

MrOiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 01:30 PM
  #80
Vikke
FHM 13 researcher
 
Vikke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bustoville
Country: Sweden
Posts: 12,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
Your right, that is the whole purpose of it all. It is a competition against a group of athletes to see who can finish a physical task first. Whether its a bike trip around France, a race to 100 meters, or a competition to see who can acquire all of the chips. What does it matter what the competition is based around? As long as it is based around a skill then it doesn't really matter to me what it is. And I think that the fact that it is a mental skill and not a physical skill makes it that much more impressive because really anyone with a little bit of math smarts can study the game of poker and become relatively good at it. A large majority of the people in the world could train their entire life and never be able to compete at the level of the TDF.

The debate is that it is one of the toughest prizes to win in "sport". That doesn't really suggest that the task you need to accomplish is the toughest.

I'm not sure what they are, but look at the odds next time for the TDF, and for the WSOP. Look at whoever is the favorite to win and tell me who has better odds to win. If the WSOP is easier to win then the TDF, then the Odds of the top rated player in the WSOP will be greater than the the odds of the top rated cyclist at the TDF.
The top cyclists would get something like 2-3-4 to 1, right?
I wouldn't bet on Ivey for less than 600 to 1 and I rank him as the best player in the WSOP.

Still, I'd say that it's entirely possible to win the WSOP even if you're a far inferior player. See Jerry Yang, Chris Moneymaker, Jamie Gold for recent examples.
In poker it's just not that easy, the best player doesn't win every single time.
If I played 100 HU sit'n'goes vs the best HUSNG player in the world, I'd still win a bunch of them due to pure luck.
If I ran against Usain Bolt or challenged Armstrong to a 100km bicycle race, I'd lose every single time. Well, as long as they don't break their legs and stuff and even if they did, I still wouldn't be a favorite.

Vikke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 01:51 PM
  #81
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
I found the odds for the current WSOP and for 2010 TDF.

Daniel Negreanu +15000 or 150/1
Gus Hansen 150/1
Phil Ivey 150/1
Tom Dwan 150/1
http://www.offshorepokerroom.com/odds-to-win-wsop.html
Alberto Contador 4/6
http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN...de-France.html

Tell me how its going to be harder for Alberto Contador to win the TDF in 2010 than it will be for Daniel Negreanu, Gus Hansen, Phil Ivey, or Tom Dwan to win the WSOP Main Event 2009 (granted some of them have already lost out)?

Boston Marathon, 13,733 male racers. Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot, 1.25/1. He finished 5th under 2 seconds behind Deriba Merga who was 5/1 to win the race.
http://www.gambling911.com/sports/bo...in-041909.html

If these races were so hard to win don't you think that the top rated participants would have longer odds at winning them? Its like saying its easier to hit a half court shot than a free throw.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 03:09 PM
  #82
Vikke
FHM 13 researcher
 
Vikke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bustoville
Country: Sweden
Posts: 12,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
I found the odds for the current WSOP and for 2010 TDF.

Daniel Negreanu +15000 or 150/1
Gus Hansen 150/1
Phil Ivey 150/1
Tom Dwan 150/1
http://www.offshorepokerroom.com/odds-to-win-wsop.html
Alberto Contador 4/6
http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN...de-France.html

Tell me how its going to be harder for Alberto Contador to win the TDF in 2010 than it will be for Daniel Negreanu, Gus Hansen, Phil Ivey, or Tom Dwan to win the WSOP Main Event 2009 (granted some of them have already lost out)?

Boston Marathon, 13,733 male racers. Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot, 1.25/1. He finished 5th under 2 seconds behind Deriba Merga who was 5/1 to win the race.
http://www.gambling911.com/sports/bo...in-041909.html

If these races were so hard to win don't you think that the top rated participants would have longer odds at winning them? Its like saying its easier to hit a half court shot than a free throw.
You're completely missing the point.

Vikke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 04:10 PM
  #83
jfhlbuffy
 
jfhlbuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
I found the odds for the current WSOP and for 2010 TDF.

Daniel Negreanu +15000 or 150/1
Gus Hansen 150/1
Phil Ivey 150/1
Tom Dwan 150/1
http://www.offshorepokerroom.com/odds-to-win-wsop.html
Alberto Contador 4/6
http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/EN...de-France.html

Tell me how its going to be harder for Alberto Contador to win the TDF in 2010 than it will be for Daniel Negreanu, Gus Hansen, Phil Ivey, or Tom Dwan to win the WSOP Main Event 2009 (granted some of them have already lost out)?

Boston Marathon, 13,733 male racers. Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot, 1.25/1. He finished 5th under 2 seconds behind Deriba Merga who was 5/1 to win the race.
http://www.gambling911.com/sports/bo...in-041909.html

If these races were so hard to win don't you think that the top rated participants would have longer odds at winning them? Its like saying its easier to hit a half court shot than a free throw.

You're funny. Your entire post, you present facts on why the TDF is harder to win than the WSOP, then at the end, you go, "And that's why the WSOP is harder to win than the TDF." It makes no sense.

I have a zero percent chance of winning the TDF.
I have a 1/6000 chance of winning the WSOP

Which one is harder?

jfhlbuffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 04:38 PM
  #84
Vomiting Kermit*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfhlbuffy View Post
I have a 1/6000 chance of winning the WSOP

Vomiting Kermit* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 04:49 PM
  #85
AUAIOMRN
Registered User
 
AUAIOMRN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
If these races were so hard to win don't you think that the top rated participants would have longer odds at winning them? Its like saying its easier to hit a half court shot than a free throw.

Going back to my previous example. The odds of winning the lottery is about 1 in 14 million for one ticket. I guess that is one of the "hardest" things any one can do then.

In case you're missing my point: "statistical unlikeliness due to chance" is not the same thing as "difficulty".
However since you already acknowledged that you view winning the WSOP as less of an accomplishment then winning TDF, I suspect you actually agree with what everyone else is saying and it's just a matter of semantics.

AUAIOMRN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 05:19 PM
  #86
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikke View Post
You're completely missing the point.
No, i'm not. I know that it is harder to win the TDF based on the physical factors of the race, it is also harder to get to the TDF as you have to be one of the best 180 cyclists in the world, and you need to somehow get onto a team. It takes years of practice and years of training, in the grand scheme of things the WSOP is no match to the TDF.

But as a single event the act of winning and overcoming longer odds is more impressive. The claim is that its one of the hardest prizes in sport to win. This means that its harder to finish first, not harder to complete the event, therefore in this argument the actual accomplishments of riding 3,500 kilometers has nothing to do with how hard it is to win. It has everything to do with how hard it is to complete the event but not how hard it is to finish 1st, every rider has to bike the exact same distance to win, just like every poker player has to accumulate all of the chips to win.

There is no doubt in my mind that winning the TDF is a harder event, that's a no brainer.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 05:20 PM
  #87
Teddy Peckman
Registered User
 
Teddy Peckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Teddy Peckman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
No, i'm not. I know that it is harder to win the TDF based on the physical factors of the race, it is also harder to get to the TDF as you have to be one of the best 180 cyclists in the world, and you need to somehow get onto a team. It takes years of practice and years of training, in the grand scheme of things the WSOP is no match to the TDF.

But as a single event the act of winning and overcoming longer odds is more impressive. The claim is that its one of the hardest prizes in sport to win. This means that its harder to finish first, not harder to complete the event, therefore in this argument the actual accomplishments of riding 3,500 kilometers has nothing to do with how hard it is to win. It has everything to do with how hard it is to complete the event but not how hard it is to finish 1st, every rider has to bike the exact same distance to win, just like every poker player has to accumulate all of the chips to win.

There is no doubt in my mind that winning the TDF is a harder event, that's a no brainer.
That's just an opinion. There is no fact involved.

Teddy Peckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 06:05 PM
  #88
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AUAIOMRN View Post
Going back to my previous example. The odds of winning the lottery is about 1 in 14 million for one ticket. I guess that is one of the "hardest" things any one can do then.

In case you're missing my point: "statistical unlikeliness due to chance" is not the same thing as "difficulty".
However since you already acknowledged that you view winning the WSOP as less of an accomplishment then winning TDF, I suspect you actually agree with what everyone else is saying and it's just a matter of semantics.
The thing is that winning the lottery has no skill involved, its purely luck of the draw. Literally its a draw, and if they draw your numbers then you got lucky.

But your right, it most likely is a matter of semantics and some people purely refuse too look at it from my angle, when I have looked at it from their angle and agreed with them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Studly Wonderbomb View Post
Nicely played Mr. Wonderbomb, nicely played.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfhlbuffy View Post
You're funny. Your entire post, you present facts on why the TDF is harder to win than the WSOP, then at the end, you go, "And that's why the WSOP is harder to win than the TDF." It makes no sense.

I have a zero percent chance of winning the TDF.
I have a 1/6000 chance of winning the WSOP

Which one is harder?
You are telling me that if you managed to become a good enough cyclist that you could get onto a team that gets invited to the TDF that you would have a 0% chance at winning? I think being good enough to put you on the starting line is reason enough to give you at least a fair chance to finish first.

I'm not sure how winning a competition that gives you 150/1 odds to win, is not harder than if you have 4/6 chance to win. You do know that 150/1 is less likely than 4/6 right???

If you are at a carnival, and there are 2 separate carnival games. Both cost $2 to play, both give you a large stuffed animal which will impress the hot girl you are with if you win. Both involve the same skill. One has 150/1 odds that you will win, and the other has 4/6 odds that you will win. Which game would you play? granted the girl isn't watching you pick the easy game.
This is the girl you are with:


And judging by the fact that you don't understand how odds work, which is a huge part of poker. I highly doubt that you would get 6000/1 odds to win the WSOP.

Heres a lesson if you want.
At the 2009 WSOP Main Event Phil Ivey has made it to the final table which will be played out November 7th, he was given 150/1 odds to win before the tournament. If he wins that means that if you had bet 1 dollar that phil ivey would win, you will get paid out a profit of $150 for being right.

At the Tour De France, if you bet $6 that Alberto Contador would win before the race, then you would have been paid out a profit of $4 for being right.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 06:13 PM
  #89
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by erixon View Post
That's just an opinion. There is no fact involved.
well of course because different people are impressed by different things. So let me rephrase is.

Winning and overcoming longer odds is more unlikely. Doing something that is more unlikely is harder* to do. Hence why it is harder for Phil Ivey to win the WSOP than it is for Alberto Contador to win the TDF.



*meaning that it is less likely to be accomplished. Not that it is physically harder to do.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 07:50 PM
  #90
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,696
vCash: 500
What are the odds of winning the Tour de France for somebody who *isn't* Alberto Contador or Lance Armstrong?

The argument you're making is ridiculous.

Manny Pacquiao is going to kick the crap out of probably anybody he faces. So... boxing just isn't very hard because look how easy it is for Manny Pacquiao to dominate?

uh, no. Manny Pacquiao dominates because he has a level of physical ability and skill that is almost unparalleled. Substitute Alberto Contador, or Georges St Pierre, or any other athlete that dominates in a sport where there's little to chance.

Plunk some reasonably qualified competitor in front of Manny Pacquiao, or Georges St Pierre, or Alberto Contador, how do you think they'd do? Mincemeat. They'd be ground beef. They'd have no chance at all. Because despite having a reasonable fluency in the skills of the contest, the gap between the elite in the field and a reasonably fluent competitor is not just huge, it's galactically enormous. It's insurmountable.

Now... plunk an internet qualifier in the WSOP, and they've got a fighting chance. Plunk a reasonably skilled qualifier in the WSOP, and they've got a fighting chance.




You're looking at it from the wrong angle. You can't say "Being the UFC Welterweight Champion is easy... why, GSP wins almost automatically every time out." But how easy is it going to win the UFC Welterweight championship if you're anybody other than GSP? It's freakin impossible. Ditto Tour de France. Ditto boxing. Ditto just about any other sport. But not WSOP.


Or, to put it in terms of your earlier question: if you want to impress a girl by looking like a star, and you have the choice of either fighting Georges St Pierre, or playing poker against Doyle Brunson/Phil Helmuth/whoever, which are you going to choose?

oilers_guy_eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 08:43 PM
  #91
syz
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
syz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfect_Drug View Post
In korea, Starcraft is considered an E-sport. They win purses of over $500,000 for that game.

To me, poker is every bit as much of a sport as Starcraft is.
The only similarity is the sitting down part.

At the very least your typical e-sport will require some reflexes to go along with the strategy, rather than luck.

syz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 09:00 PM
  #92
JBell84
Registered User
 
JBell84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY-body, EDM-spirit
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
well of course because different people are impressed by different things. So let me rephrase is.

Winning and overcoming longer odds is more unlikely. Doing something that is more unlikely is harder* to do. Hence why it is harder for Phil Ivey to win the WSOP than it is for Alberto Contador to win the TDF.



*meaning that it is less likely to be accomplished. Not that it is physically harder to do.
God are you ever missing the point... Do you understand the odds that Contador overcame to become that kind of odds on favorite to win the TDF? Think outside the box, I'm done with this conversation, you are being quite daft.

JBell84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 09:38 PM
  #93
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_guy_eddie View Post
What are the odds of winning the Tour de France for somebody who *isn't* Alberto Contador or Lance Armstrong?

The argument you're making is ridiculous.

Manny Pacquiao is going to kick the crap out of probably anybody he faces. So... boxing just isn't very hard because look how easy it is for Manny Pacquiao to dominate?

uh, no. Manny Pacquiao dominates because he has a level of physical ability and skill that is almost unparalleled. Substitute Alberto Contador, or Georges St Pierre, or any other athlete that dominates in a sport where there's little to chance.

Plunk some reasonably qualified competitor in front of Manny Pacquiao, or Georges St Pierre, or Alberto Contador, how do you think they'd do? Mincemeat. They'd be ground beef. They'd have no chance at all. Because despite having a reasonable fluency in the skills of the contest, the gap between the elite in the field and a reasonably fluent competitor is not just huge, it's galactically enormous. It's insurmountable.

Now... plunk an internet qualifier in the WSOP, and they've got a fighting chance. Plunk a reasonably skilled qualifier in the WSOP, and they've got a fighting chance.




You're looking at it from the wrong angle. You can't say "Being the UFC Welterweight Champion is easy... why, GSP wins almost automatically every time out." But how easy is it going to win the UFC Welterweight championship if you're anybody other than GSP? It's freakin impossible. Ditto Tour de France. Ditto boxing. Ditto just about any other sport. But not WSOP.


Or, to put it in terms of your earlier question: if you want to impress a girl by looking like a star, and you have the choice of either fighting Georges St Pierre, or playing poker against Doyle Brunson/Phil Helmuth/whoever, which are you going to choose?
In the last 10 years 20% of the winners have not been Armstrong or Contador. So everyone else has a 20% chance at winning.......

You raise a very good point and its something I've thought about through pages and pages of useless debate. If the best cyclist wins every year, does that make it easier or harder to win? If all you have to be is the best and come prepared and you win? Not that being the best is an easy thing to do. With poker, you can be the best, you can come prepared, play your best game make a few small mistakes and be done. If Contador make a few small mistakes he losses a few second here and there and wins the race by 3 minutes instead of 4, if GSP makes a few small mistakes he takes an extra shot to the head, but still beats down his opponent.

If there was a race where Contador who is determined to be the favorite prior to the race is given the odds to win of 150/1, would him winning that race not be more impressive than him winning a race where he is given 4/6 odds?

If the best poker player in the world is given 150/1 odds to win, what chance does an average professional poker player have?

Does a reasonably skilled internet qualifier at the WSOP really have a fighting chance? I'd say a very skilled internet qualifier does, see Chris Moneymaker, or Greg Reymer. But if someone somehow got lucky and qualified for the WSOP when they really shouldn't, he's not going to last very long, but he will pose a threat to Phil Ivey and Phil Helmuth. The guys who are going to finish in the middle of the pack at the TDF don't really pose that much of a threat to Contador.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 09:41 PM
  #94
JBell84
Registered User
 
JBell84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY-body, EDM-spirit
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
In the last 10 years 20% of the winners have not been Armstrong or Contador. So everyone else has a 20% chance at winning.......

You raise a very good point and its something I've thought about through pages and pages of useless debate. If the best cyclist wins every year, does that make it easier or harder to win? If all you have to be is the best and come prepared and you win? Not that being the best is an easy thing to do. With poker, you can be the best, you can come prepared, play your best game make a few small mistakes and be done. If Contador make a few small mistakes he losses a few second here and there and wins the race by 3 minutes instead of 4, if GSP makes a few small mistakes he takes an extra shot to the head, but still beats down his opponent.

If there was a race where Contador who is determined to be the favorite prior to the race is given the odds to win of 150/1, would him winning that race not be more impressive than him winning a race where he is given 4/6 odds?

If the best poker player in the world is given 150/1 odds to win, what chance does an average professional poker player have?

Does a reasonably skilled internet qualifier at the WSOP really have a fighting chance? I'd say a very skilled internet qualifier does, see Chris Moneymaker, or Greg Reymer. But if someone somehow got lucky and qualified for the WSOP when they really shouldn't, he's not going to last very long, but he will pose a threat to Phil Ivey and Phil Helmuth. The guys who are going to finish in the middle of the pack at the TDF don't really pose that much of a threat to Contador.
Broken logic.

JBell84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 09:48 PM
  #95
Oil Gauge
Registered User
 
Oil Gauge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBell84 View Post
Broken logic.
How so? No one is perfect. Contador didn't take every corner perfect, i don't think he won every stage. He made mistakes.

Oil Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 09:56 PM
  #96
JBell84
Registered User
 
JBell84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY-body, EDM-spirit
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
How so? No one is perfect. Contador didn't take every corner perfect, i don't think he won every stage. He made mistakes.
Because if you're the best, you make less mistakes than the next guy and win the tournament, you spent half of this thread talking about how skill prevails in poker after all.

You are so far outside the realm of reason right now that it's impossible to even be in this conversation without being completely insane.

JBell84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 10:02 PM
  #97
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
With poker, you can be the best, you can come prepared, play your best game make a few small mistakes and be done. If Contador make a few small mistakes he losses a few second here and there and wins the race by 3 minutes instead of 4, if GSP makes a few small mistakes he takes an extra shot to the head, but still beats down his opponent.
And the winner of a WSOP plays mistake free? As I recall, Moneymaker just got incredibly lucky in his win when he knocked out Ivey in 2003. In poker, you can make a mistake, and it might even pay off. That's luck for you.

oil slick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 11:14 PM
  #98
AUAIOMRN
Registered User
 
AUAIOMRN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
Winning and overcoming longer odds is more unlikely. Doing something that is more unlikely is harder* to do. Hence why it is harder for Phil Ivey to win the WSOP than it is for Alberto Contador to win the TDF.

*meaning that it is less likely to be accomplished. Not that it is physically harder to do.

This statement is what everyone is disagreeing with. Again, winning the lottery is more unlikely than winning the WSOP and therefore "harder" by your definition. The fact that it is based on chance is not factored into the definition you provided. (also note I'm not arguing on physical difficulty... replace the bike racing example with chess and it's the same thing)

To further demonstrate what I mean, let me say this: Being the best poker player in the world is far more difficult then winning the WSOP.

AUAIOMRN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 11:30 PM
  #99
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
If there was a race where Contador who is determined to be the favorite prior to the race is given the odds to win of 150/1, would him winning that race not be more impressive than him winning a race where he is given 4/6 odds?
Sure, but to assemble a field where Contador would have only a 150/1 chance of winning would require cloning, time-travel, genetic engineering, robots.

Maybe the reason that the most skilled poker "athletes" in the world have such long odds is that "skill" in poker actually accounts for far less than in real sports.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Gauge View Post
If the best poker player in the world is given 150/1 odds to win, what chance does an average professional poker player have?
Quite possibly 150/1.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2009, 11:35 PM
  #100
The Smytty Clapper
Registered User
 
The Smytty Clapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,438
vCash: 500
Don Taylor is the worst personality on sportsnet.

The Smytty Clapper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.