Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by HarryHirsch 1805 days ago
Skill when the machine decides to let you win, no chance when the machine doesn't want you to. It's not at all like poker and very much like the well-known shell game with a pea.
2 comments

It is like poker.... you can play the correct 'skill' move and still lose the hand because of bad luck (losing in the river, for example)
The machine can only "decide to let you win" if you have the skill to get close, otherwise no chance.
If the very last step of the process is that the machine decides if you won or not, it's not a game of skill.

It takes a degree of skill and coordination to pull the lever on the slot machine, yet we don't call them a game of skill because of that.

If you're 100% accurate and you still lose, it's a game of chance.

Every winner will have made a skillful shot, hence a skillful shot is required to win. It's a combination of both therefore you obviously can't claim no skill is required at all. Nobody says that a slot machine is a game of skill because nobody considers having the coordination to pull a level to be a skillful attribute.
Moat losers will have made an equally skillful shot, and the ratio of losers to winners is >> 100 : 1 because that's what the device has been programmed to do.
Nobody said that skill was sufficient to win, I am simply pointing out the obvious fact that it's still required (in response to nkrisc who claimed that no skill was required at all, only luck).
My point is the skill component doesn’t matter if it’s ultimately down to luck.
One gives you a chance to win when you are skillful. If you are skillful enough, you will win eventually just by chance.

The other may never pay out even if you are 100% accurate.

This is a big difference.

Your "big" difference is useless and changes nothing to the topic at hand. Nkrisc claimed that no skill was required at all, only luck, which is clearly false. I was just pointing out this obvious fact. Nice strawman attempt though.