US vs. UK

[turnipmonster]

I thought that whole spin on the PLO section was really stupid. who cares? david williamson is like a stereotypical PLO player. when I think of big cash PLO players, I think of guys exactly like him.

--turnipmonster

[Songwind]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought that whole spin on the PLO section was really stupid. who cares? david williamson is like a stereotypical PLO player. when I think of big cash PLO players, I think of guys exactly like him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was amused by the Englishman getting bent out of shape because Australia isn't in Europe. He'd have had a point if it weren't for the fact that the Australian lives, works, and (presumably) plays poker in Italy where he's a casino manager. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought that whole spin on the PLO section was really stupid. who cares? david williamson is like a stereotypical PLO player. when I think of big cash PLO players, I think of guys exactly like him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was amused by the Englishman getting bent out of shape because Australia isn't in Europe. He'd have had a point if it weren't for the fact that the Australian lives, works, and (presumably) plays poker in Italy where he's a casino manager. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
He's just taking any opportunity that he can to take a shot at us brash Americans and our supposed lack of intelligence. He lost and he's sore about it.

[top2pear]

I think Colclough resembled most pros who hate losing to certain "types" of players. He poked fun at the "American" way of playing PLO ("raise, REraise, RERAISE!") and said he he'd like to see it played with a little more finesse. And you could tell he took offense at the way Williamson kept hounding Engh(?) into calling off his remaining chips as an underdog.

Colclough's distaste for "the American way" reminded me of MontyCantsin's recent discussion of "scrubs" in the Poker Theory forum during the talk about Sklansky's all-in "System." Monty was referring Negreanu's complaints about the new breed of "pushers" who "only have one move" and how hard it is for "top pros" to beat them. Monty made a good point that a true, skillful player would see a threat to his skills and learn how to neutralize its effectiveness against his game by developing new skills of his own. A scrub, however, complains about how the person who beat him (a pusher) isn't really good because he doesn't have all the skills the other guy has. Colclough plays one way; Williamson another. If the Colclough always won with his way, he wouldn't complain about Williamson's way because he'd be happy to go up against it. Williamson's way is a threat to Colclough's, though, and C wishes that W would stop playing that way for reasons OTHER than those he states (namely, because it threatens his way of playing--not because it's a "bad way" to play).

[Beavis68]

What really cracked me up is there are a lot of complete maniac players from europe.

[Rushmore]

This is perfectly stated.

If "pushing" is a legal part of the game, and in no way breaks any rules, who's to say that "pros" shouldn't adapt and learn to counteract the move?

Is it true that many of the newer players "lack the finesse," etc.etc.? Sure.

If I lacked the finesse of the Great Masters, I would try to bludgeon them with this blunt object, too.

Tough. Adapt or die.