A Poker Expert! Part 1. Long, not necessarily important

[Vince Lepore]

Most of this is rambling. I'm in the process of reevaluting and this helps me.

What is a poker expert? I am not a poker expert. If you read a recent post in which I imtimated that I was and you took it seriously well then you missed my "toungue in cheek."

No I'm not an expert. I learned a long time ago to qualify my answers to questions with "in my opinion" and then go ask Mason what he thinks. Mason is an expert on playing Poker. But even Mason, expert that he is, defers to David in some areas of Poker discussion. Not that he doesn't thoroughly understand the correct way to play this game it's just that I think he needs to humor that big Sklansky ego every once in a while.

O.K. let's get serious. I consider both of these guys poker experts. There are others but since this is their forum I won't get into who or who isn't an expert. What constitues an expert on poker and how you identify one is more important.

So what would you (I) look for from a poker expert? Obviously, a person must understand basic poker concepts such as hand strength, opponnent types, game types etc. Well, guess what, there are a lot of folk around, even some bad players, that understand poker at this level. Before I go any further, I guess that I should ask whether or not we (I) even need the assistance of a poker expert?

I believe that this and other similar forums go a long way in confirming that a lot of people that play poker are looking for answers. Answers that will improve their game. Well, thats true for the most part, there are some who want answers to reinforce their belief that someone is out to get them and losing is not their fault. They don't belong here. They belong on Alan Schoonmaker's couch. For those of us looking to improve, looking to be the best we can be, we, I, need expert advice.

I am fortunate to have met and talked with some pretty damn good poker players, most on this forum, over the past ten years. I am very fortunate to count Mason Malmuth as a good buddy that has always been willing to point me in the right direction when my thinking arrow goes awry.

I believe that the number one reason for a successful poker player to find an expert that they can rely on is that it keeps them from exploding. An expert will help you keep your focus when things are going bad. The expert knows that good solid play is what winning is about and in matter of fact terms without qualifing their point are able to relay the straight scoop on just what your problem, if any, may be.

An expert will be able "hear" what you are saying. He will understand the broader issue you might be having and be able to get to the root of your problem.

O.K I've convinced myself of the value of an expert to lean on so now I'll stop rambling. I will probably make a part 2 of this to try and determine the, experience, breadth and depth of poker knowledge one needs to be considered an expert. Thanks for helping.
/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Vince

[Victor]

Interesting post Vince.

A poker expert is no different, albeit less necessary, than any other expert in any other field. Experts understand all the little things and can weight them in context with the broader scope. In poker it is understanding how each card, each bet, each opponent factors into the larger scheme of making money. A rocket scientist understands how each combustion reaction, each components' weight/COG, atmospheric conditions factor into the larger scope of safely traversing the horizon. Clearly this is a simplified version of both cases.

But, a poker expert is not necessary the to the game of poker at all. Poker will survive without experts due to the nature of the game. Poker is a game, an activity, fun and, for most, gambling. Very few strive to squeeze proper perfection out of poker. Contrarily, anyone involved in rocket science is required to push the limits of physics and technology and, therefore, needs to possess expert understanding.

But it goes further. Experts in other fields are required to teach and further the advancement of such fields. This is the basis for technology and the reason that technology is tied into capitalism. In poker this is simply not necessary. Poker doesnt care about advancement and players dont care if poker doesnt advance. Only us. Only us, who fall short of expert, yet, for some reason, still strive for it, care about advancing in poker. For us, poker experts are our beacons. They are the reason we can survive and not as you said "blow up."

But why should it matter to them. Poker is an innately introverted game. Why should they impart wisdom on us when it wont benefit them (is most likely detrimental)? Other types of "experts" need to comply with each other for monetary, technological, and humatarian advancements. But, a poker experts only advancement is in individual monetary gain. They achieve this by knowing what others around them do not know. So, it would seem silly for them to associate with us and risk giving up some advantages. Except that we provide them with more situations, more ideas, and in turn they expand their expertise while we continue to trail behind them in the distance. Some farther away than others.

Well, you got me rambling.

[Louie Landale]

No need to put "not necessarily important" and "Vince Lapore" on the same line.

I think you've described an "Expert Mentor" or "Export Poker Mentor" or "Expert Psycoanylist". Yes, your implication that finding such a person is a great idea, especially for the young aspiring folks.

And you can be that person's "Mentor". And you can be your own "Mentor". Or you can have an imaginary "Mentor" such as "Caro" or "Malmuth" or "Sklansky" and ask them to anylaze the situation (that one works well for me).

But I need to point out that "Expert Player" is NOT the same thing as "Expert Mentor". Many players play great but give terrible advice. That's because they have great table presense and other intangible strengths, but don't necissarily know the theory: maybe I should bluff 1/n of the time but they should bluff when they feel the opponent isn't going to call.

- Louie

[Lawrence Ng]

Vince,

A poker expert is one who wins money in the game consistently on a long term basis. I don't care how they do it, what their theory is. The bottom line is money talks. So having said that I consider myself an expert because I am beating up most live games for 2 - 3 BB an hour over the last year, while most "poker experts" consider the 1 BB/hour to be a good rate. So does that make me a expert? Maybe so or maybe not, because a lot of people will disagree with my tactics and plays, but when I am cashing out 4 racks of greens at the end of night for a lot of nights, then who is the expert?

I agree Mason, Sklansky have wonderful theories and fundamentals on the game, but as we all know theories can have a very strange way of working when applied in live practice.

[Louie Landale]

Yes, Knowledge and understanding are NOT prerequisites for Expert Status. Bill Hickock didn't know squat but was unbeatable. Most name tournament folks don't know much ..err.. don't understand much theory, but play great. You don't need proper calling frequencies if you can figure out when he's bluffing.

You are winning 2.5bb/hour in green chip limit games? If that's really true then yes you are an expert. Might want to move up. PM me on details of that game.

- Louie

[timmer]

Once you consider yourself an expert you've failed yourself greatly.

Once you consider yourself a student you've flung open hidden portals and enlightend dark corners.

Just my few cents

timmer