World class from 2+2 ?

David Sklansky wrote :


Vince(!)*, I am not in a good mood tonight and you have made it worse. You have the talent to become a world class player and win a lot of money. I WANT someone to emerge from this forum with that distinction. But to get there you MUST stop worrying about preflop close plays. That is simply not where the money is.


What I am focusing on here is the comment about someone emerging from this forum to become world class. I don't think it has happened, although I could be mistaken. Someone let me know if there is. I am not talking about world class players that have posted here, but a player who began here as a medium player and developed.


I think that there comes a point where these forums become detrimental to further development. I doubt that world class status can be had through these forums. Much of the thinking is too conventional and predictable. These forums are more directed at developing good middle limit players that are one or two, or even three levels down from world class. Let me know where and how I am wrong.


My question is this. Can a player reasonably expect to develop into a world class player from this forum? (Assuming the potential ability, playing experience and all the rest).


Direct your comments at for any game or tournaments. Whatever.


This question/post should not be seen as an indictment of 2+2. Developing good middle limit players is a reasonable goal. HFAP itself is directed at this level.


Regards.

certainly can and is happening. two players that have come to this forum were im my eyes both extremely smart and talented and become world class players. they may not play in the highest possible games but play quite high stakes. one is john feeney, he was a prime candidate for moving up to the top. it would have hapened probably no matter what. but his writing on 2 +2 and time he spends thinking propelled him to near the top of the heap. he is indeed world class. another is the fossil man greg raymer. he was playing up in the northeast and doing well. i believe he put alot of time here discussing strategy for altruistic reasons. he has progressed into a world class player in a short time span. so it does happen although players may just have used 2+2 as a stepping stone but im sure it has given a little boost. we have a few others here on the threshold. and a bunch who have gone from breakeven type players to winning players who can know realistically make a living from the game if they put in the hours needed.

Thanks Ray,


Yes I did momentarily forget about Feeney. Even if he wasn't 100% world class yet, he certainly is 100% world class act. Also, I know from his posts that he took lessons from Sklansky. I had thought greg raymer was already up there when he posted. thanks for filling me in though. I think it is difficult to filter out what would have happened without this forum.


How are you defining world class? I would consider an expert player to make 30 bucks and up and hour (Mason's defintion which i think is fine). But world class is quite higher than that. Hourly rate is not as stable because of availability of the games. I would say at the level that Dan Negreanu plays or higher would be my definition.


I still have my doubts though. I have begun to feel my own mission is being at least somewhat hindered by twoplustwo participation. Understand this is not a slight. I have benefited enormously here. I just need to make a big push in the next two years.


Regards.

backdoor, at the last WSOP, Jeff Shulman took an informal poll among many of the participants as to who they thought were the best players. The poll segregated tournament poker from big bet poker from limit poker. Each of these were broken down into holdem, stud, omaha, etc. Many of the players thought of as being the best limit players are guys you never heard of. Most of them are high limit players at the Bellagio. None of the 2+2 posters made anyone's list.


In my humble opinion, David Sklansky is probably a "world-class" razz player. Ray Zee, when he was active in poker, was viewed as an all-around World Class Player in no limit, pot limit, and limit poker but not tournament poker.

Jim,


This does not necessarily mean that this forum can't help develop such a player. First, this forum is not that old. Becoming world class can take many, many years. Second, success with some would lead them to stop posting. They would see it as giving more than they are getting. Third, some players may not want to reveal who they are and the way that they think.


Do you feel that one could develop into world class player from this forum? Do you think that this form could inhibit such growth?


How are you defining world class?


The level just below world class can also be highly profitable (and is very difficult to reach as well).


I have no doubt that mid level pro could emerge from here (probably has several times over), although this itself is not as easy as it sounds.


If you wish to not respond for political reasons, I understand.


Regards.

My definition of world class is someone who can beat almost all games 40-80 or lower for good money. That same player will be quite capable of beating any size game if it contains even one bad player. Those super high games with no bad players whatsoever reqire strategy alterations that are rarely discussed on this forum. But those games are also ridiculous to play in. They require a million dollar bankroll to beat for half a small bet an hour. No more than twenty players in the world can justify, to my satisfaction, playing there, rather than playing 80-160 or 150-300.

"They would see it as giving more than they are getting. Third, some players may not want to reveal who they are and the way that they think."


Ray mentioned Feeney and Fossilman. Well, those two don't post here as often as they used to perhaps for the reasons you cite.


I doubt that the Forum can inhibit one's progress to world class status but I certainly would not expect his contributions to the forum to continue with the same frequency once he gets there. For example, I am sure Feeney continues to lurk even though he is at world class level.


BTW, this is not a slight at Feeney for ditching us or anything like that. Not at all. I am just lamenting his absence because the guy truly is an amazing poker thinker and a class act to boot.

very interesting, backdoor. and perhaps it brings the question: what is a world class player?


and another question: is there such a thing as a world class LIMIT player?


don't the big name players become such from their play in the main event at WSOP??


hmmm, hmmm--other questions??

Why set the bar at world class? What'd be more interesting to me is how many manage to grind it out at mid-limits, pay the bills and such, because of the 2+2 experience. So few pull it off, that in my mind, there are only two classes (among those who have tried). The ones who are in action today, and the ones who don't.


Backdoor makes an interesting point:


"I think that there comes a point where these forums become detrimental to further development. ... These forums are more directed at developing good middle limit players that are one or two, or even three levels down from world class."


I think that results from the general tone of poker literature that bleeds into the posts. Just from writing fun articles, I know it's hard as hell to 'know your audience,' because the audience is so diverse.


For example, how many times have you read a magazine article that was speaking at sophistocation level 8 (on a 1-low, 10-high scale), and then all of a sudden a term gets defined that only someone at level 2 would not know?


It happens all the time. This is a sign of a writer in trauma. Not his fault. It's so easy to jump levels in midstream, with an audience so wide.


(For articles, what I do sometimes is pretend I'm writing an email. For posts about hands, I just write whatever pops out, thinking only of the person I'm replying to, and when starting a thread, thinking of the dozen or so most frequent contributors.)


What happens at 2+2 is posters sometimes write as if they are talking to the nameless faceless lurkers, the same audience the paid writers speak to, so the tone takes on the same tone of the books and magazines, and that means it stays lower than world-class level thinking by recycling many (worthy!) thoughts, stuff the world-classers wouldn't be talking about.


Tommy

My definition of world class is someone who can beat almost all games 40-80 or lower for good money.


By that definition, I am world class (at least in holdem). But I don't think i am world class at all. Yet. But if I continue on, I must improve myself or I will go stale.


Do you think that the paricipation in these forums can bring a player to the 80-160 to 150-300 level? (To justify this, obviously one would have to make alot more money than say at 30-60 or 40-80 to make up for the increased risk)


Can this forum inhibit this? Sometimes the forum gets me focused on interesting and entertaining side issues which may not be in the best interest of pursuing reaching higher and higher levels.


What does one do to get over the mid limit hump to world class?


Anyone feel free to answer.


Regards.

I am just lamenting his absence because the guy truly is an amazing poker thinker and a class act to boot.


Agreed!


I doubt that the Forum can inhibit one's progress to world class status


Are you sure? I mean to be the best at anything, don't you need to break from the crowd at some point? I know that I won't post hands on this forum because I found out early on that people won't except unusual reads and non conventional tactics.


I have benefited greatly from this forum, don't get me wrong.


Regards.

and another question: is there such a thing as a world class LIMIT player?


I think all the poker divisions would each have its own world class players, including limit. There are some pretty high level limit games that go on.


Traditionally we do think of the best players as being no limit players, but I don't think this necesssarily means that its true. Everyone has their niche, whether it be by circumstance or genetics or choice.


At least with limit, luck evens out over maybe a year or so. But if someone has a few lucky tournament wins, their standing lingers for years and years after, even though it might not be justified. (This is more the general public veiw, the insiders know who is good and who is not).


Regards.

What'd be more interesting to me is how many manage to grind it out at mid-limits, pay the bills and such, because of the 2+2 experience. So few pull it off, that in my mind, there are only two classes (among those who have tried).


If this forum helped create those that could do that (and I think it has), then it has completely earned its reputation.


But I was focusing on the higher levels because, you know, I am an elitist :)


What happens at 2+2 is posters sometimes write as if they are talking to the nameless faceless lurkers, the same audience the paid writers speak to, so the tone takes on the same tone of the books and magazines, and that means it stays lower than world-class level thinking by recycling many (worthy!) thoughts, stuff the world-classers wouldn't be talking about.


Tommy, but sometimes some of what we are posting is just clogging us up. Look at some of the recent threads, arguing about tiny fractions of small bets. I don't think world class thinking focuses on that.


I don't know how to explain exactly what I am thinking. My normal default.


I am just frustrated lately with what's going on here.


R

<<<I think that there comes a point where these forums become detrimental to further development. I doubt that world class status can be had through these forums. Much of the thinking is too conventional and predictable.>>>


A potential world-class player could never be held back by this forum. If this forum is detrimental to a player's further development, then that player does not have the capacity to be world-class.


If you are attempting to become a world-class player, but instead become conventional and predictable because that is how people on this forum tell you to play, you are missing the point of this forum.


Potential world-class players should read and post to this forum to find out how others play, and not just to find out how they themselves should play. If 95% of the 2+2ers recommend playing a certain way, the potential world-class player will take this knowledge and figure out how best to play against that 95%.


If you post something and 95% of 2+2ers say it's wrong, do you think 1) I should play the way the 2+2ers think I should play, or 2) this is a good play, 95% of 2+2ers don't realize this, I can use this to my advantage when playing against them.


If you change the way you play just because 95% of 2+2ers say it's wrong, you aren't thinking at a high enough level to ever be world-class.

By the way, I thought your post was one of the most interesting and thought provoking posts I've read on this forum.

David wrote:


"Vince(!)*, ...You have the talent to become a world class player and win a lot of money. I WANT someone to emerge from this forum with that distinction."


David later wrote:


"My definition of world class is someone who can beat almost all games 40-80 or lower for good money."


Well, I would venture to guess that several posters here are already world class players.


Why are you "hopeful" that someone will "emerge" with that distinction?

Mark,


I think you forget to turn off your italics (at least on my browser, it got me italicized all over :)


I do agree with many of things you have said. About the 95% disagreeing thing. Well depends who. If certain people disagree, I listen. Also, there are a few people here that are capable of getting into high level discussions, but there is so much noise pollution sometimes I can't hear my own thoughts.


Thanks for your response. Don't mind me, I am just a little frustrated with this forum lately. I am pretty stubborn about my own way of thinking and do not sway easily, but being too stubborn is also a bad thing.


Regards.

"What does one do to get over the mid limit hump to world class?"


I don't know what "one" does, but here's what I do. Nothing. I can't imagine how I'd ever get a bankroll big enough to move up unless I stretched my BR to dangerous limits on every rung of the ladder. Been there done that, at lower limits. It ain't fun. But I had no choice if I was ever go to get stable at $20-40. Now, I do have a choice to try to move up or not. Deal me out!


Tommy

"Don't mind me, I am just a little frustrated with this forum lately"


Hey backdoor, don't make me start with my "this forum is tough" sermon. Not with you. You are much to advanced in discussing poker to get frustrated by anyone and I mean anyone that posts on this forum. As David would say "reserve that for rgp".


vince

Is that really true, tommy?


I agree that you (or I) will never make enough at 20-40 to be able to move to a really big game, especially since it's a little hard to find a stepping stone around here to move up somewhat slowly.


But is that true of the no limit games?


Certainly the big game at LC's is beatable for huge profits, if you're good enough and (again) well bankrolled enough, it seems like it should be big enough and profitable enough to catapult you into the bigger games.


Or am I missing something?


- target

"Ray Zee, when he was active in poker, was viewed as an all-around World Class Player in no limit, pot limit, and limit poker but not tournament poker."


Ray:


You better give that Mercedes back.


Mason

I did not read sklanskys post from which you cite, since for some reason I could not find it.


What I think of when I think of "world class" is someone who can play different games at the highest levels and hold their own. Someone who is just an expert at one form of poker in my mind is not an expert. Someone who is expert at two games, especially if those games are stud and holdem is pretty close. If someone can play consistently with the best players in both of those games and win they are clearly world class.


Pat

I think you are onto the solution already. You talk about the forums getting "clogged up". There is a two pronged attack on this problem. Both require that most necessary of poker skills: discipline.


The first is don't read everything. In fact, read almost nothing. Like learning the players at the table and reading their hands, learn the posters and "read" their posts without even looking at them. That is, actually read posts from whatever select group you think makes the most valuable contributions, and only if the subject line suggests something worthy of your time.


The second is to make sure that your posts are conducive to world-class-wannabe discussion and analysis. Make sure that the world class aspirants know that your posts are worth reading and discussing.


Another approach to using the forums is to realize that what goes on here gives you tools and ideas necessary for excellent play at any level. Only discipline and experience will actually take you to any given level. In this regard the forums are not detrimental (if you don't let them be).


I doubt that world class players use techniques or think about things which are not discussed here (although some things may not be discussed enough - you can help with this part, backdoor). The world class players have bankroll and TONS of experience. That is what separates them from the next lower level.


Eric

just curious....do you play any omaha...do you play any game for pot limit

"Certainly the big game at LC's is beatable for huge profits, if you're good enough and (again) well bankrolled enough, it seems like it should be big enough and profitable enough to catapult you into the bigger games."


I lost my (slim) edge in that game. I haven't played it for months, since the summer lull shortened the field to a gang that ranks above me on the hierarchy of fear.


"Or am I missing something?"


Nope. The missing variable didn't occur to me until driving to LC's today. Leaving the NL game out of the equation means that in order to move up, I'd have to hit the road, a lot, and I don't think I can win or have consistent fun in that environment.


Tommy

Speaking for holdem, $10-$20 through $40-$80 are middle limit games. I agree their is a big difference between $10-$20 and $40-$80 but the difference between $30-$60 and $40-$80 is small. Lots of players beat middle limit games for various amounts of money. But the really succesful players at this level are not world class in my opinion. They are anywhere from good to excellent.


When you can play $80-$160 or higher and beat the game for 100 grand per year or better based on playing full-time (1700 hours per year or more) you become an excellent player in my opinion. When you can play $200-$400 or higher on a regular basis (1700 hours per year or more) and beat those games you start approaching world-class.


The twenty or so players you refer to in your post are probably the world class players.


But here is the real acid test. A strong $80-$160 or higher limit holdem player would have no problem beating a $30-$60 game. A strong $30-$60 player may or may not have a problem beating an $80-$160 game. I doubt very much if Lenny Martin would have any problem beating a $30-$60 game. Not to mention names, but I really doubt that some of the prominent $30-$60 and $20-$40 players would do very well in $80-$160 or higher.


The bankroll argument is a common one and is an excuse for staying at the same level year after year. But as long as you do not have to live off bankroll, you simply play at a lower limit game and grind out enough bucks to fund you in the higher limit game. If you get burned at the higher limit game, you simply drop back and recover the loss. By iterating this way, you never go broke and you will eventually overcome the bankroll problem.


Bankroll is not the real problem. It is a temporary obstacle. The real problem is acquiring the skill.

This forum is a marvelous mechanism for improving your game. I think there are many good middle limit players who participate in this forum. But, in my opinion, if you don't play at least $80-$160 or higher you simply aren't world class.


There is nothing wrong with being being a middle limit grinder all your life. This is especially true if you have to live off your bankroll. But a middle limit grinder is like a major league ballplayer who bats about 0.275 or maybe a par golfer. These are significant accomplishments but no where near "world-class".

To me, it's a question of "how" a world class player will emerge from this forum, not a question of "if." There are different ways a player can get a boost here. One is by learning something new from reading it in a post. Another is by developing a new idea through discussing it with others. Yet another way is to learn something by critically analyzing the common knowledge, finding its flaws, and then improving upon it.


I think a potential world class player would do all of the above, but would do something in addition. He would have an "aha" moment. And I can't think of more fertile ground for getting the stimulation totrigger a new insight than reading and participating in the discussions here. The expertise ranges from the ridiculous to the sublime, and it's important to know that it may be the ridiclous that triggers the a concept that gets you to a new level.


About five minutes before I read your post i was thinking that this forum might be 2 + 2's greatest contribution to poker theory. What's needed to produce a world class player is mental stimulation, and they've got plenty here.

Some flattering comments above, undeserved I think :-/, but I'll add my two bits. Here I'm just rambling around through some side issues that have come up. If I get a chance I'll write another post actually responding to Backdoor's question.


Clearly there are different acceptable definitions of "world class." I would think David's definition encompasses a proportion of players similar to what we'd typically be talking about if we referred to world class tennis players or, even more certainly, world class baseball or football players. Wouldn't lots of folks say any NFL player is a world class football player? But sometimes we might reserve the designation for those considered the best of the best. Backdoor's definition, along those lines, would be analogous to talking about the top ten male an female tennis players in the world or a major sport all star team. Maybe we should designate two categories. How about "world class" (WC) and the tip top sub-category "ultra-primo-nearly-Irish" (UPNI)? (Just curious - How many chess grandmasters are there? Can I assume they are automatically all considered world class?)


I think Tommy's contentment with the limits he plays, related to his desire to maintain his proportionately big cushion and the comfort it provides is also quite understandable. Many an aspiring world class player has lost his bankroll by stretching it too far, trying to move too high, too fast. Yet some who have made it to high limits did it just that way. I know of a couple of 400-800ish limit players who I'm told got there (financially) by taking shots at big games (maybe 150-300ish and bigger) whenever they looked really good. They risked large chunks of their bankrolls this way, but could probably afford to. I don't think they were relying heavily on poker to pay the bills, as Tommy is. Anyway, they were lucky enough not to meet with disaster, and are now regulars in those big games and recognized as "all world", or rather UPNI.


I assume successful players at this level either wanted to try for the maximum earnings possible in poker, or wanted to overcome the challenge of the biggest, often toughest games, or both. Different players have different interests and goals. (And as David points out most are deceiving themselves if they think they can earn much more without unreasonable added risk in many of these games.) I also fully understand Backdoor's comment, "I must improve myself or I will go stale."


I'd say there are a number of posters here who meet, or would meet, David's definition of WC (especially if he's not requiring that level of ability in multiple games, as Patric Dicaprio is.) I think everyone pretty much knows who they are. I say would for some because they don't live where they can regularly test their skills in limits like 40-80 or higher. But it's clear from their thinking that they could beat such games, perhaps given only a little initial adjustment time. I assume most here have even less access to games bigger than 40-80. This does put a crimp in any plan to become UPNI.


Consider the example I know best - me. :) Here in San Diego the biggest limit (apart from the pot-limit game) is 40-80. But I've made lots of trips to L.A. to play 80-160, and am proud of having beaten every limit I've played up through that level. (though you could certainly find a few of my opponents who'd raise an eyebrow about that... Uh, Tommy, you ever hear about a call I made against Alex one night in the 80 game in L.A.? I think I gave poker authors a bad name on that one. Though based on some logic, it was still pretty bad, and had to look utterly bonehead - despite winning the pot for me :), a small blessing given how I was running that session.) But I've also tired of the drive, and the repeated long days away from my family. Moreover it takes a long time to log a lot of hours at a limit which you can't play more than about once a week on average. My reality is that without moving to L.A. or Vegas - which isn't likely to happen - I can't be a true regular in the bigger games. I'm sure others are in similar boats. As a result, I've recently started to feel somewhat finished with respect to my goals in poker, aside from simply making more money. So since I also have more financial security right now than I did just a few years ago (No, not because of my vast poker fortune. :^) I've recently been taking some time to play a lot less, and think about the future a lot more. But poker's still cool and everything.


One poster who I think clearly has the potential to make it to the big mix games is "small caps" scott. He's not posting right now; he doesn't even have internet access as he's on a break from school, leading the (semi) spartan writer's life in L.A. But I imagine he'll be here again sometime. He's actually more serious about writing, though, and who knows where the next few years will take him. At any rate, a little running good and he'll be playing in Andy Fox's game before long.


Backdoor can likely do it too, if he wants. Though I haven't posted here so much recently, I've read enough of his posts to know he thinks about the game deeply enough to go about as far as he wants. I also believe he is highly creative, which can of course be quite an asset to a player wishing to move beyond more common levels.


About that Card Player poll Jim mentioned: I must say I thought it was kind of bogus. First, the players polled were a biased sample in that they were all at the WSOP. This undoubtedly made it rather Vegas-centric. (I know, there were of course exceptions, but I mean on average.) I think that explains Jim's observation that a lot of the players were high limit players at the Bellagio. As far as limit hold'em goes, it looked like the respondents had never heard of California, though they did happen to mention a couple of players who go back and forth between Vegas and L.A. While it's clear every player on the list is quite strong (I've played with two or three, and others have very consistent reputations.), there are a few L.A. players (and of course some from other places both in and out of CA) who are certainly as strong as several on the list, probably stronger than some. I even suspect a couple of Vegas players were slighted. But I'd hazard that most are probably quite content having evaded the 'sixty highly regarded players' radar. Now, this doesn't mean there should have been any 2+2 posters on the list, but I do strongly suspect there are a couple or so who could sit down with those on the list and surprise them a little.


Anyway, I'm done.

I would consider the very best players at the 30-60/40-80 level to be world class, and I'm not sure it is possible for a top 80-160 player to consistently make "alot more money" than the very best 30-60/40-80 pros (in public casino games). Is it possible?


I believe much of the discourse on these forums regarding poker theory and strategy is world-class. Application of these principles to high-stakes games may produce different tactics due to facing stronger opponents, but the underlying principles remain the same. I do not believe the CONTENT of these forums would interfere with the progress of someone who has the potential to become world class.


Nevertheless, the wisdom contained in these forums is certainly not sufficient to reach world-class status. Concentration, memory, self-control, courage, observation skills, understanding opponents, manipulating opponents, recognizing patterns, quick thinking...such skills are not readily acquired through participation on a message board.


Regards,


Mike


PS: I hope I didn't contribute much to your disillusionment.

Acquiring the requisite skills through experience is mandatory I would think. In comparing golf to poker, I would rate someone who's expected hourly rate is $50 playing poker higher than a par golfer. I suppose that some par golfer's can hustle for $50 an hour consistently but I doubt if there are that many. Could be wrong about that though.

"About that Card Player poll Jim mentioned: I must say I thought it was kind of bogus."


At sports, we ALL get to watch the top performers perform. At poker, we don't. And even if we did, poker is a game of incomplete information. We could watch "good" or "bad" plays and not even know when they happened unless every hand were turned over and explained. Plus, who decided that a player rating should be based only on money? If I were a judge, no consistently ill-mannered player would ever get my vote as world class. (World classy?)


"sub-category 'ultra-primo-nearly-Irish' (UPNI)?"


lol


"I think Tommy's contentment with the limits he plays,..."


Comes from being way non-competitive, less materialistic than most, with an uncommonly strong need to enjoy playing.


"Different players have different interests and goals."


It's a tad annoying when non-professionals (Alan S. for example) write as if they've walked in my shoes, only to blurt absurd presumptions. Any wise man would know that one's potential for contentment is unrelated to the activity.


"I don't think they were relying heavily on poker to pay the bills, as Tommy is."


Good news there. I'm saving up all the extra money I've been making from writing articles and I'm going to buy a brand new coffee pot and maybe a chair.


"I also fully understand Backdoor's comment, 'I must improve myself or I will go stale.'


The way I figure it is, I must improve or go broke. Winning will only get tougher, as more players enter the fray without bad habits to break, and as my mind weakens with age.


"Uh, Tommy, you ever hear about a call I made against Alex one night in the 80 game in L.A.?"


Oh gawd yes. Here's a line from 'Perpetual Commotion,' an article about Alex. 'He wears his emotions on the surface, like chains begging to be yanked.'


"My reality is that without moving to L.A. or Vegas - which isn't likely to happen - I can't be a true regular in the bigger games. I'm sure others are in similar boats."


::: raising hand :::


Tommy

a neophytes's comments are usually closer to an expert's than an "average" player...jmho..gl

as usual gl..

"When you can play $80-$160 or higher and beat the game for 100 grand per year "


100 grand per year works out to $50/hr. Why would someone that could beat a 30 - 60 game for a bb or more an hour play 80 - 160 for $50/hr. That's hardly world class in my opinion. At least it's not world class intelligence.


You are also, IMO, understimating the value of a Bankroll. Couple that with opportunity (no of games spread) and many players that could play higher (skill wise) simply opt for the more consistently found mid limit games.


Vince

"ultra-primo-nearly-Irish" (UPNI)?


I take it the question mark means that you are a bit confused, John. I'll be happy to straighten you out. the I in UPNI is for "Italian". I'm sure your ego got the best of you but I forgive.


Vince

"Why are you [David] "hopeful" that someone will "emerge" with that distinction?"


Because a caring teacher feels that way, in any field. I think it's touching, seriously.


Tommy

nt

of his sense of humour????

>> Why would someone that could beat a 30 - 60 game for a bb or more an hour play 80 - 160 for $50/hr. That's hardly world class in my opinion. At least it's not world class intelligence. <<


Truly a classic comment and right on IMO.


>>You are also, IMO, understimating the value of a Bankroll. Couple that with opportunity (no of games spread) and many players that could play higher (skill wise) simply opt for the more consistently found mid limit games.<<


I couldn't have said it better myself.

Do you think luck plays a part or is it just skill?

I would consider the very best players at the 30-60/40-80 level to be world class, and I'm not sure it is possible for a top 80-160 player to consistently make "alot more money" than the very best 30-60/40-80 pros (in public casino games). Is it possible?


I think so. There are some good 80-160 games out there if you look hard enough.


JG

I believe that becoming a world class player is hard work. We have to go over problem after problem and understand it. Not just problems of an individual hand, but classes of hands need to be analysed.


To be world class, I believe you need to be excellent at mathematics and psychology.


Just recently, David enlightened us on a concept where a drawing hand can bluff a certain amount of time to become a favorite with less than 50% chance of making a hand.


It's very good knowledge but it, and whatever other knowledge we have, needs to be worked and worked again and again for higher level concepts. Without doing this hard work we will all stagnate.


Spikey

I think it is skill assuming approximately equal luck over a significant period of time. I think the biggest difference between a good high limit player and a good middle limit player is the ability to read hands and put opponents on hands.

This brings up something I've always wondered about. Do you think that along with reading opponents better, great players are harder to read?


BTW the phrase is I respectfully disagree not respectively. :-) SammyB

Yes, I think they are harder to read because they are capable of a vast range of moves. Let me give you one example. A great player knows that a good player is capable of releasing a fair hand like top pair, top kicker when raised or check-raised on the turn. If the great player catches a draw on fourth, he might well raise a good player but just call a mediocre player. He knows that a mediocre player will never lay a hand down so his semibluff simply won't work. He will have to make a hand. But against the good player he has a very good chance of winning the pot outright. The great player might also be able to work out what the good player was betting on. If he reasons that the good player just has top pair, top kicker and not something better than he knows his semibluff raise has an even higher probability of allowing him to win the pot right away than otherwise. The great player would also notice things like the fact that the good player is easier to move off a hand when he is winning than when he is losing or vice-versa and take that into account.


P.S: I guess I better get my book proof-read.

"The first is don't read everything. In fact, read almost nothing. Like learning the players at the table and reading their hands, learn the posters and "read" their posts without even looking at them. That is, actually read posts from whatever select group you think makes the most valuable contributions, and only if the subject line suggests something worthy of your time."


I think this is the way it usually evolves. At some post-beginner point, it's worth reading nearly everything. But later you make better use of your time by picking and choosing. You can probably find something here worth thinking about at nearly any level of expertise. But increasingly you'll look more for those occasional nuggets, I think.


I want to add that my own decrease in posting is caused buy a bunch of things, but is in part the result of simple time demands, and priorities. I'd like to talk poker more, but there are dogs to read to and kids to walk, or something like that.

skp,


I still post here almost every day, it's just that I don't have anywhere near the time to keep up with all of the posts, so I pretty much stick to the Tournaments Forum, as that is what interests me the most.


And the new Vince! Forum, of course.


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

I'm not sure it's deserved yet, but I appreciate it anyway.


I have been playing the 150-300 mixed game at Foxwoods lately, but I haven't beaten it yet (I'm slightly behind after half a dozen attempts). I believe I will be beating it soon, unless it changes for the worse, which it might now that the summer season is over. It is surprising, really, the hands these guys play. One night, my only big score, a guy was playing almost every hand in 7stud8, and playing them aggressively. Boy, was he shocked when my 4h5h6h, plus a 3s on 4th, turned into 6s full by the river. He even had pocket AA that hand, to boot.


Anyway, thanks again.


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)