Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 30 Dec '06 22:22
    whats a better game and why? also are their any good poker games for pc?
  2. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    30 Dec '06 22:24
    Originally posted by Arrak
    whats a better game and why? also are their any good poker games for pc?
    Most PC games are such things as alien freak slasher and poker (at least that's all I see on the shelf at Best Buy).

    Poker is a game of managed luck; chess has no luck.
  3. Donation briancron
    nunquam perdo
    30 Dec '06 22:24
    Originally posted by Arrak
    whats a better game and why? also are their any good poker games for pc?
    Welcome to the only chess forum!
  4. 30 Dec '06 22:46
    I found this somewhat funny and related to the topic: http://beta.uschess.org/frontend/news_7_221.php
  5. 30 Dec '06 23:29
    Originally posted by amolv06
    I found this somewhat funny and related to the topic: http://beta.uschess.org/frontend/news_7_221.php
    Lol, very good.
  6. 30 Dec '06 23:40
    Originally posted by Arrak
    whats a better game and why? also are their any good poker games for pc?
    Try playing poker with no money at stake. It looses it's appeal very quickly
  7. 31 Dec '06 00:55
    Originally posted by Arrak
    whats a better game and why? also are their any good poker games for pc?
    Poker is too much about luck.
  8. 31 Dec '06 01:00
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    Most PC games are such things as alien freak slasher and poker (at least that's all I see on the shelf at Best Buy).

    Poker is a game of managed luck; chess has no luck.
    We like to think that; Chess has its element of luck too.
  9. 31 Dec '06 07:10
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    .

    Poker is a game of managed luck; chess has no luck.
    Yet the truth is that poker is a game of skill.
  10. 31 Dec '06 07:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Jusuh
    Yet the truth is that poker is a game of skill.
    Yes of course it's a game of great skill (anyone who thinks it is not is deluding themselves) but even chess has a very tiny element of luck whereas poker has a much higher element of luck. I think that could be demonstrated by the odds that would be offered in a match between say Kramnik versus someone just inside the top 100 in the world and the odds that would be offered between Jamie Gold (who I believe is the top money earner, if not certainly a top player) vesus someone just inside the top 100 in the world. It would be virtually impossible to get a decent bet on Kramnik at any sort of odds. I remember what Howard Lederer said one night after he played badly (by his standards) but got the cards, was 'good job I wasn't playing chess tonight'. Apparantly he is supposed to be quite good at chess, I think it said he was master level (but I know these tv programmes can tend to exaggerate) does anyone know his chess strength?
  11. 31 Dec '06 08:20 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by stevetodd
    Yes of course it's a game of great skill (anyone who thinks it is not is deluding themselves) but even chess has a very tiny element of luck whereas poker has a much higher element of luck. I think that could be demonstrated by the odds that would be offered in a match between say Kramnik versus someone just inside the top 100 in the world and the odds tha (but I know these tv programmes can tend to exaggerate) does anyone know his chess strength?
    from FIDE
    Lederer, Peter - Rating 2051

    Maybe a relation?
  12. 31 Dec '06 08:35
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    from FIDE
    Lederer, Peter - Rating 2051

    Maybe a relation?
    I think it's probably a case of the tv stretching the truth, why let a lie spoil a good story etc
  13. 31 Dec '06 11:46 / 1 edit
    http://www.chessclub.com/activities/finger.php?handle=philhellmuth

    Not Howard Ledered but atleast a top poker player. 2300 in 5-minute games on ICC is up there with the GMs.

    The difference between chess and poker is in poker it is all about raising your odds. Any poker player willingly accepts the fact that any decent player can have a good couple of days and win any tournament, in the long run the cards even out and a better player will have the odds on his side.

    In chess odds are not a factor. You can get lucky, but if you do, it is always the other player's mistake, and not an outside factor (like being dealt good cards, which neither player can do anything about).

    The bottom line though. If you think chess is more fun, play chess, if you think poker is more fun play poker.
  14. 31 Dec '06 12:14 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Zlaire
    http://www.chessclub.com/activities/finger.php?handle=philhellmuth

    Not Howard Ledered but atleast a top poker player. 2300 in 5-minute games on ICC is up there with the GMs.

    The difference between chess and poker is in poker it is all about raising your odds. Any poker player willingly accepts the fact that any decent player can have a good couple of da though. If you think chess is more fun, play chess, if you think poker is more fun play poker.
    Is that the real Hellmuth? I only ask because it's funny the commentators on the poker keep going on about Lederer's chess but have never mentioned Hellmuth's (maybe it's cos they do not like him or maybe they just do not know?). Or maybe they have and I have missed them talking about it.

    I agree with everything you are saying but the point I was making about odds was to demonstrate the difference in the chances of them winning in a one off match, not that odds had anything to do with the game of chess
  15. 31 Dec '06 12:55
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    from FIDE
    Lederer, Peter - Rating 2051

    Maybe a relation?
    http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?12138610

    Rating was 1951

    The great thing about poker right now is how many people are playing. Most of them are terrible. I netted just under $2400 last year. and I am not good at all.