EPTOn April 21 2011 23:02 ondik wrote:
WTF has to do with anything? I need to learn maths to know I should probably conbet into passive fish? Really?
Show nested quote +
On April 21 2011 22:59 Boblion wrote:
I think you need to learn some maths sorry.
On April 21 2011 22:58 ondik wrote:
No, I compared one specific situation, is it so hard to understand?
On April 21 2011 22:44 Boblion wrote:
I'm clueless really ?
Dude you are the one comparing poker to RPS
LOL.
On April 21 2011 21:52 ondik wrote:
If you are saying there's no skill involved in RPS you are quite clueless. It's like saying to a poker reg when he makes continuation bet with nothing against passive fish that it's pure luck that he won. There are different suequences, strategies, tells, ways to force either of RPS etc. Of course, if you play randomly, you are guaranteed to have 50/50 w/l ratio in long run, but this fact doesn't matter at all as at RPS tournaments everyone plays to win.
On April 21 2011 19:31 Boblion wrote:
Some people win twice at the lottery in their life. Are they skilled or just lucky ?
On April 21 2011 19:28 shurgen wrote:
Well just looking at the link, it appears that some of the same players do keep on winning.
I personally believe that RPS is a `skill` game at the higher levels, although it is definitely of the most luck-affected games out there.
On April 21 2011 19:01 leetchaos wrote:
Someone has to win. The question is can the same people win or make it to the final rounds with reliability.
On April 21 2011 16:46 CDRdude wrote:
I feel that I have to bring this up:
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock-paper-scissors#Tournaments
The amount of cash involved in this melts my mind.
On April 21 2011 16:38 Mikilatov wrote:
Hm, I wonder how 'predominant influence' is determined.
I mean, if you were really good at psychology/reading people, you could perhaps turn the 33.33333% chances in rock paper scissors to 34-35%, or something. If the odds were set on 33.33333%, you could effectively have an 'predominant influence' on winning in such a game.
Hm, I wonder how 'predominant influence' is determined.
I mean, if you were really good at psychology/reading people, you could perhaps turn the 33.33333% chances in rock paper scissors to 34-35%, or something. If the odds were set on 33.33333%, you could effectively have an 'predominant influence' on winning in such a game.
I feel that I have to bring this up:
In 2008, Sean "Wicked Fingers" Sears beat out 300 other contestants and walked out of the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Casino with $50,000 after defeating Julie "Bulldog" Crossley in the finals.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock-paper-scissors#Tournaments
The amount of cash involved in this melts my mind.
Someone has to win. The question is can the same people win or make it to the final rounds with reliability.
Well just looking at the link, it appears that some of the same players do keep on winning.
I personally believe that RPS is a `skill` game at the higher levels, although it is definitely of the most luck-affected games out there.
Some people win twice at the lottery in their life. Are they skilled or just lucky ?
If you are saying there's no skill involved in RPS you are quite clueless. It's like saying to a poker reg when he makes continuation bet with nothing against passive fish that it's pure luck that he won. There are different suequences, strategies, tells, ways to force either of RPS etc. Of course, if you play randomly, you are guaranteed to have 50/50 w/l ratio in long run, but this fact doesn't matter at all as at RPS tournaments everyone plays to win.
I'm clueless really ?
Dude you are the one comparing poker to RPS
LOL.
No, I compared one specific situation, is it so hard to understand?
I think you need to learn some maths sorry.
WTF has to do with anything? I need to learn maths to know I should probably conbet into passive fish? Really?
I have no idea why you are talking about poker. What is an RPS passive fish ?
