09-11-2002, 06:02 PM
This is probably an ongoing polemic in the minds of 2+2ers and many in the poker world, but I am interested enough to bring it up.
For those players who consider themselves good/smart enough poker players that they can dispense solid advice, what advantage does that present to the advice-giver. Who really wants to build a better poker player, one who has a better chance of taking your money? Or is good, solid (maybe therefore more predictable) poker good for the game overall? Or are people around here just that nice that they don't mind giving a leg-up to the neophytes?
I am not necessarily referring here to the Sklanskys of the poker world, who presumably stand to make a more consistent living by selling books on the subject than standard deviation at the poker table would allow. I am think more specifically of someone like Greg Raymer (FossilMan) who doles out excellent advice on every aspect of tournament play. For one thing, it seems like this could contribute to competition becoming tougher overall, but also given the good possibility that someone who reads his advice will be playing at a tournament table with him, it could give valuable insight into the way he plays and thinks. Granted, even with this edge, it still would be tough to overcome a great player, but there is an edge.
Just wondering,
shaniac
For those players who consider themselves good/smart enough poker players that they can dispense solid advice, what advantage does that present to the advice-giver. Who really wants to build a better poker player, one who has a better chance of taking your money? Or is good, solid (maybe therefore more predictable) poker good for the game overall? Or are people around here just that nice that they don't mind giving a leg-up to the neophytes?
I am not necessarily referring here to the Sklanskys of the poker world, who presumably stand to make a more consistent living by selling books on the subject than standard deviation at the poker table would allow. I am think more specifically of someone like Greg Raymer (FossilMan) who doles out excellent advice on every aspect of tournament play. For one thing, it seems like this could contribute to competition becoming tougher overall, but also given the good possibility that someone who reads his advice will be playing at a tournament table with him, it could give valuable insight into the way he plays and thinks. Granted, even with this edge, it still would be tough to overcome a great player, but there is an edge.
Just wondering,
shaniac