View Full Version : Jim Brier - A Guy that Must a Lot of Heart

02-05-2002, 03:56 PM
I've got a new term (at least I haven't come across it before) called "forum appropriate." I didn't post this on the Mid & High stakes hold'em forum because I wanted to be "forum appropriate" or may a better term is "forum correct."

Jim Brier is getting dissed a little bit on the hold'me forum I mentioned and I just wanted to say that I think Jim must be a guy with the intangible quality referred to as "heart." To me a player that has "heart" has both an inordiante amount of guts and has an incredible desire to win. Don't think I'm right? What other poster has made as many posts about hands where they screwed up and screwed them up so badly? He does it to get better and if you think it's easy to take a hard look at your mistakes and have them scrutinized by so many I think you should take note of how few do it and do it so honestly and openly. In my mind it shows a great desire to win. Yes I find fault with some of what Jim states about poker and at times I feel he is being stubborn but I don't find fault with that much and who among us is perfect anyway?

02-05-2002, 05:00 PM
Well said, Tom. I have never met Jim; I have sometimes disagreed with his advice posted here and in his columns. But no one was more gentlemanly and dedicated to helping than he was when he posted here. A class act, period.

He helped put a man on the moon, so I'm sure he can take the heat.

02-05-2002, 06:45 PM
Backdoor called Jim the most altruistic poster here...I agree wholeheartedly.

02-05-2002, 09:41 PM
I guess I just wanted to take timeout to say thanks... I have been coming here for a little over a year and just wanted to say thanks for some thought provoking and entertaining posts and some excellent advice.

In particular I'd like to thank :

Internet Gambling : MS Sunshine and Chris Alger

Other gambling games : wildbill

Tournaments : Greg Raymer

Other Topics : Andy Fox, M, HDPM, SPM, Chris Alger (again) and Vince

and for running the whole shebang,

Thanks to Mason, David and Chuck.

Ok...enough grovelling lol



02-05-2002, 11:31 PM
I would add Rick Nebiolo to the list for other topics and for his play of the hand contributions. He is well spoken and a gentleman.

Alden Chase (tyro)

02-06-2002, 12:02 AM
I would also like to think Dave in Cali, for his help in understanding how to play the poor mooks whoes entertainment dollar has helped pay my tuition. I think more than any other poster here he understands the low limit mentality, that makes 3-6 so different from 30-60.

02-06-2002, 12:27 AM
Good posts.. Sometimes it seems like Im the only non expert here when I read these things

Fred G Sanford

02-06-2002, 02:58 AM
They deserve a round of applause. They make the forum.

02-06-2002, 11:08 AM
"Sometimes it seems like Im the only non expert here when I read these things "

Aaaah, don't you worry about that Fred. You're in good company - we're all just bluffing...


02-06-2002, 11:34 AM
I agree too. Got to give you a nod for myself as well, Andy; particularly on the Other Topics forum.

I love the way these forums have evolved, with class acts all over, whether they agree with Mason or not. It's great for me, a middle of the pack chump (probably flattering myself there).

Where is JB anyway?

02-07-2002, 09:05 PM
Jim Brier is why I come to 2+2. I wrote a post. He replied. A few days later I was at Oceans Eleven and two guys were talking about 2+2 and I jumped in. It was Jim Brier and Bob Morgan. I didn't know much about 2+2 yet, but I knew I wanted to go where they went.

I came home all giddy to write here about the rendevous. I said that I couldn't get a line on Jim's play because he never saw a flop, but then, we only played for three days. :-)

Yeah, Jim plays tight. So tight that if I hadn't met him, I'd probably be leading the lynch mob. He writes in absolutes about things that aren't, and that's a style of poker writing that tastes bad to me. Only because we met do I know that his writing style does not reflect the humility that is unmistakable in person.

I constantly think of Jim's thoughts while refining my game because Jim has convinced me that if a game is soft enought to live off of, then it can be beaten with a simple plan. Creativity, flair, spunk, shutspah, whatever it is, those art-like qualities we admire in competition, they are not required to win at poker.

Doesn't mean I won't keep looking for the unusual and new. To me, that's fun. And I value fun up there with money. But I always spend chunks of hours doing it how Jim does it too, because, if it had to be done that way, all the time, it could be. Things is, only people with Jim's consistently iron will can pull it off. In that way, I suspect Jim is a better player than virually all of his detractors, and he can play my money, however cautiously, anytime.


02-08-2002, 12:19 PM
"...his writing style does not reflect the humility that is unmistakable in person."

He's never come across that way to me with his writing and posting here.

I'm glad you're here and I wish we saw more of Jim still. I want everyone here, so we can all be one big fuzzy bunch. Where's Dan Hanson too.?!