Las Vegas Gambling Tips: Poker Theory vs. Reality — Part Two
On The Town With Vegas Vic
By: Victor H. Royer
Welcome to Las Vegas! My name is Victor H. Royer, but everyone just calls me Vegas Vic. I was named after that famous neon sign in Downtown Las Vegas, that cowboy with the hat on top of the Pioneer Club, always waving his hand and beckoning to his long love, Sassy Sally, on the other side of the street. I will be writing a few articles for AccessVegas.com, so I hope you enjoy them.
This article is continued from Poker Theory vs. Reality — Part One (Continued)
Poker Theory vs. Reality — Part Two
Assuming that we accept the three items outlined in the last issue, Part One of this two-part article, what exactly is it that we find? Is it the reality that we will receive pocket Aces exactly each 220 deals like clockwork? Well, of course not. Nevertheless, the theory indicates that that should be the case. The same applies to the winning percentage when beginning with pocket Aces being about 1/3rd of the time. Does that mean that it will always happen like that each and every time? Well, of course not.
Everyone agrees that while the theory and statistics indicate that that should be the case, the reality is that it isn’t so. That is always explained within the contention that the theory and the calculations are “an average” as determined from the sampling, which is usually the running of 10 million simulated hands, these days mostly on computers. Well, that’s a pretty neat and easy explanation and it makes perfect sense as long as you’re willing to agree to the three assumed principles, as above described. But what if you don’t agree? What if your position is that the 10 million hands usually used as a sampling to determine such calculations and percentages and odds of the frequency of occurrence are simply too small for such a sampling to have validity in the real world?
What if your position is that among the infinite universe, a sampling of 10 million hands can in itself be nothing more than an anomaly? Well, you tend to run into problems from people who are far too zealous in defending what is considered to be “established” scientific and mathematical thinking. Furthermore, what if your contention is that the reality of the game of Texas Hold’Em really has very little to do with such statistics or perceived percentages or odds of the frequency of occurrence, but instead is an independent situation entirely on its own within each and every deal, and each and every occurrence of any such events. This, of course, assumes nonsequential consequences and nonlinear causality and instead focuses the realities of such events firmly in the lateral concepts of quantum theory.
Which one is correct? Well, as in all such theories, and particularly in poker, it depends. It depends on how you think about the game of poker, in this case Texas Hold’Em, and how you are willing to navigate your way is through the learning of the rules of the game and the actual applying of such rules through your skill to achieving the goal of winning. The world of tournament poker is full of railbirds who have busted out because of overreliance on what can only be described as “traditional thinking”. On the other hand, especially in recent times, the world of championship Texas Hold’Em has seen the emergence of many great players, and very successfully profitable players, whose entire approach to the game seems to defy such “traditional thinking”. Names such as Gus Hanson, Daniel Negreanu, John Stolzman, and even Michael Mizrahi certainly come to mind. Of course, there are many other players of notable names whom I have not included here by name but who certainly also belong to this category of incredibly successful modern tournament players.
The point here is the same as that which has emerged throughout human history, and that is that what is often called “traditional thinking” or perhaps “established concepts”, which also includes such more generally applicable ideology as “traditional scientific thinking” or “established scientific principles” have always not only stifled intellectual progress, but have led to stagnant dogmatism who’s very fervent defenders have been those very same zealots who vocally defend only that way of thinking, and consequently, often for many long years and even centuries, prevent others from being able to showcase or describe what we sometimes call “out-of-the-box thinking”.
Although in our society this is not nearly as prevalent as it had been in times of Galileo or Tycho DeBrahe, or Archimedes, or Euclid, or Newton or Einstein, we nevertheless find ourselves often mired in just that one way of thinking, looking at everything from “inside the box”, often not realizing that there is anything that could even be considered as being “outside the box”. To my mind, such is also applicable to the game of Texas Hold’Em, and in particular to the concepts as they apply to tournament play.
Click to read Poker Theory vs. Reality — Part Two (Continued)
Victor H. Royer, known as Vegas Vic, is the author of 42 books. Mostly known for books, articles, and columns on casino games and gambling, he is also the author of New Casino Slots, Great Gamblers: True Stories and Amazing Facts, The Great American Joke Book, as well as his works of Fiction, which include: Another Day, and the Western: Riders on the Wind. Versatile and multitalented, Royer is the creator, producer, and host of the Web-TV show Great Casino Slots, now showing at www.LasVegasLiveTV.com. He also composes music and performs under the names Glenn Diamond, Pappy Jones, Hans Dorfmann, and Miguel Armandaiz. For more information, please visit him at www.MoreCasinoDeals.com and www.GamingAuthor.com. Sign up for the Insider Advantage Newsletter at: http://www.accessvegas.com/membership
His books can be ordered through this website, by following the links provided
(c) Copyright 2016 Victor H. Royer. All rights reserved. For syndication purposes, contact GSR Holdings Inc. at: [email protected]
Return To Las Vegas Gambling Tips