Art or Science ?

[thetank]

Much better thread from bolt here.

[bolt pp]

and a largely luck-based game at that.

End of this forum then, we all best go and get proper jobs

[bolt pp]

Much better thread from bolt here.

sigh! you just didn't give me enough time to fck it up yet

[kinboshi]

[kinboshi]

[bolt pp]

Much better thread from bolt here.

sigh! you just didn't give me enough time to fck it up yet

[X]Kinboshi fucked the thread up for me

[kinboshi]

Much better thread from bolt here.

sigh! you just didn't give me enough time to fck it up yet

[X]Kinboshi fucked the thread up for me

[X] My pleasure.

[PocketLady]

Art? Science? Neither! It's just a game, and a largely luck-based game at that.

Science? Think CERN, think Hawkins, think DNA.

Art? Think Picasso, think Ballet, think Shakespeare, think The Beatles.

Phil Bull, the legedary Timeform founder, described horse racing, which many take as seriously as poker, as "the great irrelevance". Poker is just that.

We are getting just a tad above ourselves if we think of our hugely fun & entertainng pastime of poker as Art or Science.

Tikay, do you disagree then that poker is a skill?  Roulette is something I would consider as only a game.  The house has the advantage all of the time, even if there are those who think they can beat it.  Poker on the other hand is beatable long term if you are a better player than your opponents.  Although poker can neither be said to be an art or a science, it is still possible to say that it encompasses these elements.  I don't think we are silly enough to try comparing poker to biology, or poker to painting, but I think what the OP is getting at is which of these two things is more integral to winning.  Maths is a science, and it's fair to say that there is a large mathmatical element in poker.  There is also what I would describe as the instinctual element which could be described as an art.  

[ShatnerPants]

Art? Science? Neither! It's just a game, and a largely luck-based game at that.

Science? Think CERN, think Hawkins, think DNA.

Art? Think Picasso, think Ballet, think Shakespeare, think The Beatles.

Phil Bull, the legedary Timeform founder, described horse racing, which many take as seriously as poker, as "the great irrelevance". Poker is just that.

We are getting just a tad above ourselves if we think of our hugely fun & entertainng pastime of poker as Art or Science.

But if sticking a load of dirty clothes on an old bed is art, and setting fire to a schoolroom with a dodgy bunsen burner is science.

Then there must be a compromise, surely.

It's like calling the Sun a newspaper.  It is, of sorts, just without the newsy bits.

Well, poker is life....

And life is.....

What ?

[tikay]

Art? Science? Neither! It's just a game, and a largely luck-based game at that.

Science? Think CERN, think Hawkins, think DNA.

Art? Think Picasso, think Ballet, think Shakespeare, think The Beatles.

Phil Bull, the legedary Timeform founder, described horse racing, which many take as seriously as poker, as "the great irrelevance". Poker is just that.

We are getting just a tad above ourselves if we think of our hugely fun & entertainng pastime of poker as Art or Science.

Tikay, do you disagree then that poker is a skill?  Roulette is something I would consider as only a game.  The house has the advantage all of the time, even if there are those who think they can beat it.  Poker on the other hand is beatable long term if you are a better player than your opponents.  Although poker can neither be said to be an art or a science, it is still possible to say that it encompasses these elements.  I don't think we are silly enough to try comparing poker to biology, or poker to painting, but I think what the OP is getting at is which of these two things is more integral to winning.  Maths is a science, and it's fair to say that there is a large mathmatical element in poker.  There is also what I would describe as the instinctual element which could be described as an art.  

I don't disagree at all that poker requires skill. A % of skill, the amount of which nobody can quantify, but it combines luck, & skill. But to suggest it's an Art or a Science, well.....

Long term, yes, better players will beat poorer players. A degree in Science or Art won't help much, though.

[ScottMGee]

Out of two, I have to go for Science.

Reason - you can teach a computer to play Poker.

[Jon MW]

Out of two, I have to go for Science.

Reason - you can teach a computer to play Poker.

You can teach a computer to play any game - does that mean any game is a science?

Art? Science? Neither! It's just a game, and a largely luck-based game at that.
...

Tikay, do you disagree then that poker is a skill?  ...

Ditto: Most games have an element of skill. So Monopoly, Scrabble, Game of Life etc. are science?

[Royal Flush]

Everything is science

[kinboshi]

Everything is science

Even art.

[WYSINWYG]

Everything is science

Even art.

Take science.
Call it art.
Sell for $6 million.
Repeat.