Chance vs. Skill

[geekor]

[quote:12d30ee92f="tersignf"][i:12d30ee92f] [b:12d30ee92f]Again, comes down to knowing the cards, the game, and your opponents. There is no substitute[/b:12d30ee92f][/i:12d30ee92f].[/quote:12d30ee92f]

haha I have indesputible evidence against that, but I'm not allowed to share it :oops: :roll: :cry:

[JOELKING]

[quote:82fa926bfc="socalchiro"]I see your point...But

When a lefty weighted lineup faces a Carpenter or a Smoltz in PNC or Safeco and loses while throwing a good lefty SP, you gotta wonder a bit no?[/quote:82fa926bfc]

Happens way to often, Now is that "skill or luck"

[JOELKING]

In addition, Strato, isnt the most skilled game around, not like chess, chess by far is the most skilled game around, yesa it has tiny little bit luck. when your opposition makes bad move.. Yes i do agree you need more games under your belt, but I am convince strato is more luck then skilled.

[NFLed1]

[quote:49165369cf="devilrage"]In addition, Strato, isnt the most skilled game around, not like chess, chess by far is the most skilled game around, yesa it has tiny little bit luck. when your opposition makes bad move.. Yes i do agree you need more games under your belt, but I am convince strato is more luck then skilled.[/quote:49165369cf]

Strat baseball is sort of a read-it-and-weep-or-jump-for-joy game, there is some strategy but it's not like chess at all. Over the short term luck can play a big role but over the long term the luck will approximately even out. The key words to that, though, are long term and approximately. If someone has played in 5 leagues and has a losing record overall then that is likely (not certainly) due to skill or the strategies they are using or not using, that's a long enough time for the luck to balance out approximately in my view.

If you want a more chess-like game try the Strat-O-Matic CD-ROM football game and play head-to-head online (there are many leagues). There is still a good amount of luck involved but on every single play your playcalling matters as you try to outguess your opponent's strategies and strategy makes a huge difference.

[durantjerry]

Reading through this thread reminded me of a description my father use to use when a guy was a good card player. He used to say they were "consistently lucky".

[rgimbel]

the bottom line is it is a dice game so there is a large amount of luck involved you cant guarentee victory even with the best team assembled and managed perfectly all you can do is give yourself a fighting chance.

[geekor]

[quote:a430c61844="rgimbel"]the bottom line is it is a dice game so there is a large amount of luck involved you cant guarentee victory even with the best team assembled and managed perfectly all you can do is give yourself a fighting chance.[/quote:a430c61844]

Exactly,

theorectically, say you could make a league of 12 people. theoretically say you had 2 teams in this league. then say at the 150 game mark, the entire league was reset to game 1 and re-run. How much would you bet that the team that had the best record in the league now would be below .500? How about the WC leader have the 2nd worst record in the league, even though nothing has changed? theoretically of course.... :wink:

[tersignf]

but if you simmed it a 100 times it would oscillate to a fairly consistent result expectation. It's just stats. When someone plays 50 or 60 teams and generally has a winning record, it's probably not luck. a 530 win pct is pretty significant in that case.

Just like there's a hall of fame separating .280 hitters from .300 hitters...2 onehundredths different result but very significant over thelong term

[Coffeeholic]

[quote:769b4a3b47="geekor"][quote:769b4a3b47="tersignf"][i:769b4a3b47] [b:769b4a3b47]Again, comes down to knowing the cards, the game, and your opponents. There is no substitute[/b:769b4a3b47][/i:769b4a3b47].[/quote:769b4a3b47]

haha I have indesputible evidence against that, but I'm not allowed to share it :oops: :roll: :cry:[/quote:769b4a3b47]

What'cha talkin' 'bout Willis?

[HUDAMAN]

The card thing is a good analogy. A really good poker player is going to be able to tilt the odds in his favor, maybe up close to 60/40 depending on who he's playing against, but he's still going to lose 40% of the time.

Take a look at some of the best poker players in the world, most of them are excellent statisticians, chess players, engineers, etc. I can almost guarantee you I wouldn't want to play hold 'em against a bunch of good strat players who had figured out the odds.

Math is a certainty. Over the long haul, the most skilled managers will (and have) surfaced.