Whim, Not Luck.

If I had to rate the top five questions I am asked the first time a player finds out I coach poker, this one would make a strong bid for number one all-time:

"Coach, how much of a factor would you say luck plays in poker?"

What they want me to say is that it is a factor, and that their continued losses are excusable.

"Would you say it's 70-30?  Like 30% luck?  I read somewhere that maybe it's 80-20..."

Or maybe you read somewhere that it's 50-50.  Or 90-10.  That depends on the mood of the writer at the time, and how he busted out of his last tourney.

Last time I was in this kind of conversation and encountered the 70-30 follow-up question, I shot back:  "Hey, did you know that 87% of all statistics are made up?"

I should know.  My College Thesis was full of made-up stats and findings.  Did they really think I went out and interviewed three thousand people in one month's time?

The point I am making is that anyone who has the gall to assign a skill-to-luck percentage split is, well, spitballing.  Was there a study?  How was this measured?  If my skill puts me in a situation where I shove all-in on the flop against naked Top Pair and I have fifteen clean outs to a straight or flush, how much luck will I need to win?  If he folds, was I lucky?  If he calls and I blank out was I unlucky?

When you make the long-term optimal play, the answer is you need zero help from luck.  If it is definitively +EV, luck cannot fuck up your fate in the long run.

If you play life like a lottery, you are going to have to get lucky.

This is because Luck favors no one.

One of the first things I make sure students understand is that no amount of training or studying will ever ever ever EVER make you luckier than you already are.  It may seem that more experienced players are luckier and always seem to survive crazy situations, but that's because they don't cross busy freeways with blindfolds on.

Luck favors no one.  Every dog has his day.  What you do on your day, well that's up to you.

Hey, how about this study where some serious math and simulation was done to report that Texas Holdem was 88% skill-based?  What about that 12% luck?

They are the geniuses, so I'll take their word for it, within the context of skilled control: if they say that 12% of the time I have absolutely no control over the outcome, then it isn't even worth worrying about, because that 12% of instances is going to go either way anyway.  We split that.  That's a wash.  Just because I don't have control of that 12% does not mean you do.  It's the skill to control of the 88% of instances that will wtfpwn you.

To say that Luck affects the game is a truism.  It's like saying the earth's rotation affects night and day.  It just is, so what?

So my textbook answer to the luck query will usually sound something like this:

"While it is true that luck has an affect on the outcomes of poker games, the true nature of the game is to make the best decisions with the hand you are dealt, the information that you can get, and the actions that are available to you."


"Oh yeah?  Well yesterday I 3bet a guy and he called me with pocket twos, flopped a set, and felted me!  How do you explain that?"

Mike Caro pointed that out as something that seems like Luck, but is actually a function of Decision.  I love what he calls it:  WHIM.

WHIM means he makes that call sometimes, and sometimes not.  That is his decision.  That was a hand he was dealt, and that was an action available to him.  Whether or not he was gong to flop a set was insignificant.  What is significant is why he makes this call.

Does he isolate your 3bet range to AK?  Is he stuck and trying to gamble his way back to even?  Does he have reason to believe he is lucky today?  Does he think he can outplay you?

Luck is unpredictable, so we never bother with it.  Whatever flops, is going to flop.

WHIM, however, is something you might see coming.  If you pay attention, you can catch wind of whimsical plays.  As I mentioned already, you can look out for a few signs that a player is going to leave solid ground for a flight of fancy:

If he often talks to you or speculates on what you are playing, he is planning something whimsical.  If he shows disdain or lack of respect for your image, or thinks he has your "solid" range figured out, he is going to get funky.

If he is stuck and his buyin is way smaller than the amount he is stuck, he is going to be very whimsical. If he is constantly shuffling his dwindling stack of chips, those chips are gong to go in on a whim.

If the game has run wild with multiway pots and fishes scooping with awful hands, he is going to let his whims take over.  It isn't because he has studied the algorithms of how the cards have been falling ("ang sipag ng Jack ngayon ah!") but because of basic human flaws:  Envy...Greed.


Our challenge is to figure out when the nit is finally going to crack and 4bet shove preflop into our AQs with A6o.  On a whim.

Focus on your opponents.  Even the best ones are going to crack sometime.  If you can predict whim - If you can catch that spazz - that's Skill.

And after we make this call, the nit would inevitably say something like:

"You're lucky that I didn't have a hand that time."

To which we reply, "I agree Sir.  I was blessed with 74.699% Luck that time."