Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

Yeah, it's someone who believes that people should be free to do as they please as long as they don't seriously harm others. For example, when I'm drinking and looking to dominate a small nlh game, and someone racks up and leaves with a win of a bunch of my chips, if they come back and tell me it was nice playing with me, I should have the liberty to tell them "it's a shame you left, I was gonna take all those chips of yours" without a lot of crying about it after the fact...

And, having read a bunch of his historical posts on substantive strategy and psychology over the past couple of days, I assure you that his absence is a substantive loss for this site (if he has the good sense to stay away after being scolded by people who should have appreciated his participation more than that). But whatever--I guess you guys got to stand on principle, and cost/benefit analysis be damned...

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, it's someone who believes that people should be free to do as they please as long as they don't seriously harm others. For example, when I'm drinking and looking to dominate a small nlh game, and someone racks up and leaves with a win of a bunch of my chips, if they come back and tell me it was nice playing with me, I should have the liberty to tell them "it's a shame you left, I was gonna take all those chips of yours" without a lot of crying about it after the fact...


[/ QUOTE ]
One may hold the political belief that government cannot restrict a person's liberty as long as that person is not harming others (this is called libertarianism) while still criticizing people for being cocks. Do you see why?

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, it's someone who believes that people should be free to do as they please as long as they don't seriously harm others. For example, when I'm drinking and looking to dominate a small nlh game, and someone racks up and leaves with a win of a bunch of my chips, if they come back and tell me it was nice playing with me, I should have the liberty to tell them "it's a shame you left, I was gonna take all those chips of yours" without a lot of crying about it after the fact...

And, having read a bunch of his historical posts on substantive strategy and psychology over the past couple of days, I assure you that his absence is a substantive loss for this site (if he has the good sense to stay away after being scolded by people who should have appreciated his participation more than that). But whatever--I guess you guys got to stand on principle, and cost/benefit analysis be damned...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'll have a hard time convincing both democrats and republicans alike that they are supposed to be opposed to libertarianism as you described it. You also failed to give any reason as to why poker players would be libertarians, and more importantly, why libertarians would advocate your complaining but would pounce on a polite suggestion as if it were a mortal sin.

Conducting cost-benefit analyses of what valid criticisms we should not make (maybe we should treat them all as philosopher-kings?) is ridiculous. If Paul was that upset over a situation that was really of his own making, then it's unlikely he was long for these forums regardless of this particular thread.

Then again, maybe he left because we're all libertarians.

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
id get up and leave as soon as you lost one of your early gambool buy-ins to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some dude sits down and overcalls all-in with T7. You win the hand, and leave???

Okay, if you believe the guy can totally outplay you, and you know what he's doing, sure, as soon as he gets a large stack you should leave. (I don't see why you'd leave as soon as he loses an early gamble to you, shouldn't you stay until he wins a gamble?) But my point is that I doubt many players who double up against him are going to leave.

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

Yes, they certainly "may", but the question was whether they "should"...in my experience around winning card players (which is fairly extensive), they tend to have thicker skins than the people whining here about poor manners from a guy who wasn't looking to give you any lessons in manners, but sure might have improved your nlh game through discussion. You're certainly right, in a narrow sense libertarianism ties to government restrictions of liberty. But in a broader sense, it means lighten up and don't chase away the best players here by trying to impose some "nanny state"-type restrictions on how they should interact with others, even if those restrictions might make some of the more sensitive of you less offended at the margins. Libertarians also don't like campus speech codes, even at private universities. Do you see why?

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, they certainly "may", but the question was whether they "should"...in my experience around winning card players (which is fairly extensive), they tend to have thicker skins than the people whining here about poor manners from a guy who wasn't looking to give you any lessons in manners, but sure might have improved your nlh game through discussion. You're certainly right, in a narrow sense libertarianism ties to government restrictions of liberty. But in a broader sense, it means lighten up and don't chase away the best players here by trying to impose some "nanny state"-type restrictions on how they should interact with others, even if those restrictions might make some of the more sensitive of you less offended at the margins. Libertarians also don't like campus speech codes, even at private universities. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is really the silliest point I've seen in a while. Libertarianism has nothing to do with lightening up, and has no say on whether people should try imposing social pressures on other people to be less of dicks. This "broader sense" relates to libertarianism in the same way that saying thank you at the dinner table relates to conservatism. The example of speech codes is irrelevant here-nobody's forcing Paul to shut up in the way that the campus is. Libertarians don't care if people tell Paul Phillips to play nice...do you see why?

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
in my experience around winning card players (which is fairly extensive), they tend to have thicker skins than the people whining here about poor manners from a guy who wasn't looking to give you any lessons in manners

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, which one of us left in a huff?

SpaceAce

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Paul Phillips is classless. Very simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

couldnt agree more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where is all of this coming from. I just read this thread, and the comment Paul made was kinda-funny / good natured. He was simply teasing the guy about taking his money. I mean aren't we men here? Is this really upsetting?

We all know he didn't say it, like "God you inferior player, I can't believe you are leaving the game before I get to [censored] you up.

Seriously though why all this Paul hostility. I met him just once, in Barcelona during the heads up championships last year. He had busted out early so he was watching the games from the sidelines with his wife. They were both very friendly, and he left a good impression on me. I even got a free Jack D. out of it.

Paul Phillips: class act
 

I recently had the good fortune to meet Paul over a dinner in Vegas. During this time, he generously engaged me and my poker rookie friends as we discussed short-handed no limit tactics. He produced a little "I gave Paul Phillips a bad beat" poker chip which we all thought was great. At the end, he generously bought dinner for the whole group.

In my limited experience, Paul seems to take his poker results in a very easy-going and light-hearted manner. I got the impression that he enjoys the battle, the theory of the game, not so much the results. He discussed the theory of Scrabble with as much excitement as he did poker. It seems totally inconsistent with the person I met for the comment in question to have been delivered with any malice.


Just my 2 cents.
Eric

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

I've heard William Shatner is mean to Star Trek fans, too.

Leonard Nimoy dude, Leonard Nimoy. George Tikay (Sulu) still tours.

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
He produced a little "I gave Paul Phillips a bad beat" poker chip

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I can see why you disregard any comments here that point to his arrogance. Makes sense to me.

[ QUOTE ]
Paul seems to take his poker results in a very easy-going and light-hearted manner. I got the impression that he enjoys the battle, the theory of the game, not so much the results.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thus, the personalized Poker Chip! Do you have a poker chip with your name on it? Do you have a website that touts your "Poker" accomplishements? Please.

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I can see why you disregard any comments here that point to his arrogance. Makes sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't disregard anything. I merely said that I have met him and spent a few hours talking to him, and he seems like a very decent guy, not the [censored] you're making him out to be. If he says he didn't mean anything by it, that it was just a joke, then I believe him. What qualifies you to make a character assessment Vince? A post from someone else recounting a single comment? Nice.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you have a poker chip with your name on it? Do you have a website that touts your "Poker" accomplishements? Please.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

www.ericlindauer.com/poker.html. I don't have poker chips with my name on them, but my friend has a set with his. I guess that just proves that everyone but you is an arrogant jackass. Nice talking to you Vince.

-Eric

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

Read the thread. I have an internet history with Mr. Phillips. If you do not detect his superiority feelings through the comments he makes to a few posters in this thread then you are just not listening or possibly living in a PP dream world.

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

From your website: "Eric Lindauer. Plays limit hold 'em for a living in party poker's 15/30 game. Since turning pro, I've made 2.84 big bets / 100 hands, which is $60 / hr / table."

So you make $120 an hour playing 15-30 at Partypoker. That comes out to $4800 a week at 40 hours on just two tables at a time. You made almost $250k last year just from poker.

Again from your wesite: "My standard package is $150 to review 200 hands and write up a critique of your play "

Certainly reviewing 200 hands and providing a critque will take much longer than an hour. In fact I'm sure that this effort would take considerably more than one hour. You seem to be selling yourself short. Or maybe you are a fraud, which is more in line with what I believe. Please provide a 2000 hr continuum from party activity account showing a $220k win. Then maybe I'll believe you.

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
So you make $120 an hour playing 15-30 at Partypoker. That comes out to $4800 a week at 40 hours on just two tables at a time. You made almost $250k last year just from poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

So many bad assumptions. You assume I was multitabling. You assume I play 40 hours a week. You assume I care whether or not you believe me.

You don't know me and you've already accused me of being a fraud. You and Paul don't get along? It must be Paul.

[ QUOTE ]
Certainly reviewing 200 hands and providing a critque will take much longer than an hour... You seem to be selling yourself short.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dead on. Part of my compensation is the enjoyment of teaching. It's the same reason I post here for free. Of course, I also post here because it's fun to point out the failed logic of people who enjoy tearing others down.

Which reminds me: it's been a pleasure talking to you Vince.

Eric

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

Hi anduril:

I haven't read all of this thread but here's the way I understand it. Paul Phillips sat in a small game (for him) and while having a little fun shot off some money. Not much for him but enough to make the other players in the game happy. Then, as part of the Paul Phillips experience, he got a little impolite and some of you are thinking that he should have acted with a little more class.

Now here's the way I see it. First off, going to a cardroom is not the same as going to church. (Right Paul?) The only cardroom that I know of that tried to equate the two was the Las Vegas Hilton and they closed their doors a long time ago.

Second, after Paul has fired off some money, he has earned what some of us refer to as "Sucker Privileges." That is if his behavior is not exemplatory, we should forgive him. And to prove my point, if Paul ever gets in my game and makes a fool of himself, as long as he's a big loser, I won't say a thing. On the other hand, if he does this and wins, especially if he takes my money, that's very different.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

FWIW, Mason, later posts explain how after a little early LAG action, Paul was a big winner in the game, stacking people left and right.

As for the general issue, if Paul said his comment was in good fun, whatever, that's good enough for me.

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
So you make $120 an hour playing 15-30 at Partypoker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vince, FWIW, I'd be surprised if someone as good as Eric only made $120/hr playing 15/30 online. Maybe he doesn't like multi-tabling. I know of multiple people who are not as good as him who have much higher winrates than that over hundreds of thousands of hands of poker. FWIW, over 250k+ hands, I made over $200/hr playing 4 tables of $10/20 online.

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously. There are so few original ideas on how to play nl hold'em around here...and a good number that have shown up have come from Paul.

And now he's gone.

Great.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

How many poker strategy posts has he made on twoplustwo?

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
So many bad assumptions. You assume I was multitabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't assumre anything. Show me the money! You are a fraud!

From your website: "I generally play at least two tables at once"

Anyone that believes this guy is a pro withoout asking for some form of proof is a .... dope!
Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know of multiple people who are not as good as him who have much higher winrates than that over hundreds of thousands of hands of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure you do! And everyone knows that Armegeddon will be here in the year 2000! Oops, did we miss that too. Everybody has a story of all of these wealthy internet poker superstars! Show me the stats--- maybe then I'll believe it!

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

are you seriously questioning wether or not El D made 200/hr over 250k hands at 10/20?

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

Yes

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

pokerhorse?

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everybody has a story of all of these wealthy internet poker superstars! Show me the stats--- maybe then I'll believe it!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure why you would believe spreadsheet or pokertracker shots any more than someone's word, since that stuff is trivial to forge. Anyway, I don't care what you believe, I was just pointing out that imo it's unlikely elindauer is lying, that's all.

As for all the people making tons on the Internet, just take a look. Many of the regulars on this site who were playing 10/20 or 15/30 a year ago are now playing 100/200, 300/600, 25/50NL, 50/100NL, etc as their regular games. Maybe they all have just been diligently depositing money every day to get the bankroll for those games - or, imagine this, maybe they actually won it.

Read this from Eric!
 

Read the following and I'll show you why I don't believe. It is a recent post by this Eric guy. It's on confidence intervals. Go to the bottom and read the last paragraph. then tell me how many hands (and hours) that this super pro is basing his 15-30 stats on. If 300 to 600 hours is significant enough to determine that he is a winning pro at 15-30 then I guess you are right. I just don''t buy it!

"Mike just dropped a monster post in which he says, to sum up, that limit poker is a joke because you have to play 25 million hands to know whether or not you're any good. He uses this argument to imply that the luck factor in limit hold 'em is very high.

I have now seen statements like this many times in many forms, and I've never seen anyone bother to debunk it, so I'm going to try to do it now. Here's the deal:

Let's say we look only at a player's results, and we attempt to determine if this player is a winning player. Fine. We check out his EV, we look at his standard dev, and we calculate a confidence interval. As Mike points out, correctly, we have to have a huge number of hands to determine somewhat conclusively that this player is a winner. Of course, this calculation uses no knowledge of poker whatsoever.

In real life though, we have much more information. Namely, we can look at the actual hands that were played, both by the player and by the opponents, to aid us in our estimate of how much money this player is making.

For example, if I see a player call 3 cold with A8, I don't need 2 million hands to tell me he's a losing player. I can do it in one. And if I'm playing with this guy, and he's losing money, then I'm winning it. Now I just look around the table, and look at all my opponents this way. If I can identify lots of obvious leaks, then I must be winning. It's that simple.

I've played about 30K hands of 15/30. Using confidence intervals, I can barely prove that I'm a break even player. But I know I'm a substantial winner. I know I'm not just on a two standard dev hot streak. I know this, because I ignore the mathematics of confidence intervals and use the much faster converging mathematics of poker. I know that calling 3 cold with A8 is making a hugely losing play, one that I don't make. I know that playing any 2 suited is a losing proposition. And I know a lot of things more subtle than that. I can see the poker mistakes that my opponents make, and I know that I am winning money from them.

This confidence interval stuff has been blown way out of proportion.


Good luck.
Eric "


Vince

Re: Read this from Eric!
 

Two points.

1) If Eric has only played 30k hands of 15/30, he likely has very little idea about what his true win rate is. My winrate over 50k chunks of hands had pretty big differences. However, my cumulative winrate at 50k, 100k, 150k, etc was relatively constant.

2) I have never played w/ Eric, so I have no idea how he really plays. However, just based on the understanding of the game he has displayed in the posts of his I've read, I have no doubt that it wouldn't be a big deal for him to win $120/hr playing 15/30. That is based on comparing him to other players whose win rates I'm aware of over very large sample sizes. Of course, he could be a tilt-monkey or suffer from any number of problems that prevent him from being a significant winner. I don't know or care. My point was simply that the $120/hr he claimed was a very reasonable and believable number given what other people are making in that game.

Re: Read this from Eric!
 

Hi Masked Man:

Also, the paragraph the Vince references is similar to stuff I have written in the past. When you can see that many of your opponents are rountinely making significant errors and you do not make thsoe errors you have a pretty good edge.

best wishes,
Mason

Re: Paul Phillips: class act
 

[ QUOTE ]
Read the thread. I have an internet history with Mr. Phillips. If you do not detect his superiority feelings through the comments he makes to a few posters in this thread then you are just not listening or possibly living in a PP dream world.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

Are feelings of superiority still wrong when they are well-founded?

Also, it's pretty evident that if one non-family member genuinely likes and respects phillips (elindaur), it's one more than respects you, vince.

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

Mason,

I think you, like many other repliers, are taking my comments to Paul to mean too much. I wasn't anywhere near the Bellagio when this happened, but The Ram has twice said his story is 100% accurate and I know him very well so I believe it did as well. The point of my post was that it's one thing for a poker player to have sucker privileges, but this is different. I think most of us understand the reasoning behind Paul's early play in that game and for what it's worth I think he's absolutely right for doing it. But Mason, if you just destroyed an entire 30-60 table while a young pro sitting next to you is also doing well and wants to tell you what a joy and experience it was to play with you, would you berate him about his play or taking his chips because he's awful? I should hope not. Especially if he has a certain red cover book in his hand with a pen. FWIW I think this thread has been blown way out of proportion.

Let\'s put this thing to rest
 

Mason-
I agree with you for the most part. But, I differ on one point. To explain, and to clear up some misconceptions everyone has about me and the circumstance, and hopefully to end all this, here we go:
While we were all playing, Paul was doing a lot of talking. He was telling stories, discussing bits of strategy, just chatting it up. Now, as I said before, I'm a pretty decent player and most people there were pretty bad. The last thing that Paul was saying on a regular basis was exactly what I was also thinking: I really want to take all the chips on this table. I'm totally cool with that. In fact, since I had the second biggest stack, I didn't think anything of the fact that he spent the whole time telling me he wanted to get my chips into play, because if I thought I was better than him I'd be licking my chips looking at his stack too.
So, all that said, when I left the table with a bunch of money, I can also concede that he thought "Damn, I can't believe all those chips are leaving the table when the guy replacing him can only buying for like 30% of that amount". But, by the time I came over to introduce myself (I was a few seats away during the game and didn't want to be awkward), this is a time to put all that aside. After all the comments about taking my stack that he made while we were playing, there is no chance he was just making a little joke with his comment at the end. And, given that I came to him showing effusive respect and admiration, even if it were a joke it would have been in poor taste and timing.
That's all I meant by my original post (which by the way was over 50% commentary on stuff that I learned while playing with him and how glad I was for the experience). If people don't agree at this point that his words were a little classless, or if they do agree, either way there is no longer any real point to this line of discussion.
Paul, as I previously said, I was a little let down by your response but I was glad to play with you and would be glad to do so again. I hope you will come back to the forum; I just think that you should try to compartmentalize a bit between displays of impressive poker insight (which I believe you possess) and the self-pride/confidence/ego/whatever that drives you.

~The Ram

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

This thread is really sort of sickening in a variety of ways.

The thing that keeps circling in my head while I read this nonsense is the following:

I believe that every player who has ever had a regular home game has made comments to other players in the lines of "sorry you've got to go before you could lose all that money." This is not to mention of course, all the players who don't have regular home games who make the same comments. If you've never made a comment like it, well, what can I say beyond "try lightening up some time, maybe grab a beer, or something." If you're incapable of messing around with people in a friendly manner, you've got way more problems than someoen who may or may not be arrogant.

Additionally, as was pointed out, there is no social contract that says that you have to be a sweetheart to the other players in the game. Nothing. If you say haven't heard, said, or been told worse things at a poker table than it seems Paul said in this case, you are likely a liar.

Vince: You swore you would never post in a thread that was about Paul, ever again. Perhaps you should stick to that promise, considering your "internet history" with Mr. Phillips.

Worst of all about this thread is the fact that it ostensibly started as something approaching a strategy question. Sadly, it looks like any time there is a strategy question in any way attached to someone who is anything like a celebrity, it devolves quickly into a character attack.

Yeah, sure "Paul Phillips is classless." Sure. He may not have the queen's tact, but he doesn't actually appear to be a jerk, just have a sense of humor. He also seems to be posessed of the same "disorder" many intelligent people have, that of having little patience for ignorant, obnoxious people.

Grow up guys,

citanul

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
yes, you should treat him better because he provides you a huge net benefit by thinking about the game and sharing it with you for free. that is, you should treat him the way you'd treat a teacher in a school, not the way you'd treat someone in a relationship of equals--and for the same reason, i.e., respect for their greater stature (assuming you treat teachers with more deference for reasons beyond their ability to give you a bad grade)

[/ QUOTE ]

if you think PP is going to come here and give free advice to thousands of anonymous posters about their game that is worth a crap, you are silly. his business is winning money in poker games. he must maintain an edge to maintain his income.

as for those complaining of his rudeness, i would expect nothing less from a professional poker player. i play against pros all the time(though none that any of you have heard of), and none are what i would call friendly or "bubbly". in fact, a fistfight is not unheard of, and firearms are constantly present. the f-you's, and c-suckers go in one ear and out the other.

i play regularly in just one "friendly game", and, quite frankly i tend to bore of it quite quickly.

cheers!

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

while the sentiment of your post is kind of in line with my own thinking, some of your post is just stupid and silly.

the argument that paul is a professional so he will never offer advice for free on a message board is the particular thing that stands out as idiotic. the clear reason being of course that he has offered advice on poker for free on a message board. so do many other actual real live poker pros who post on this message board. they don't seem overly worried about maintaining their edge by not ever answering a question or providing insight. neither does paul.

further, your explaination of "expecting nothing less of a pro" is just moronic as well. there are, once again, many, many polite pros. many, infact, that post here. i'm a bit curious where it is that you "all the time" play with pros who carry guns to the table.

this all goes above and beyond the fact that i really doubt that paul meant his comments to be derogatory when they were said, and probably just meant them to be some dickish kidding around.

citanul

Re: Read this from Eric!
 

Eric has it exactly right.

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

[ QUOTE ]
In limit you can beat bad players by tightening up. In no-limit there are a LOT of ways to beat them and tightening up is nowhere near the most profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul. You are by all acounts (not that I have that many) a good NL player, but this statement about limit is incorrect: There are lot's of ways to beat bad players in limit and tightening up is just about the least profitable of those. I suspect that at the core strategies for beating bad players is very similar in NL and FL but the execution is somewhat different. I refer to Ed Miller on how to beat bad FL players.

Re: Read this from Eric!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Eric has it exactly right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that is one hell of a claim. Please explain just what is it that Eric has "exactly right."

He's a fraud!

Vince

Re: Paul Phillips, $2-5 Mirage
 

Ups! I didn't read the whole thread before I posted: I appologize for putting poker content in here!

Re: Read this from Eric!
 

"He's a fraud!"

"Now that is one hell of a claim."

LOL.

Right now, if I asked you if you were a "winning" poker player (whatever that means), would you need to play 50,000 hands before you could answer? Eric is putting statistics in their proper perspective.

Mason what about these win rate claims!
 

Mason,

What is your opinion concerning these claims of Eric making 60/hr/game at 15-30 online. And El diablo (the masked man) that many people that "he knows" make at least that. Of course Eric only claims 30k hands, maybe 300 Hrs, of play at 15-30. Am I wrong to ask for some kind of verification of these numbers? Especially from a guy that has a wesite and is selling lesson "packages" for around $150. Oh, I forgot this Eric guy majored in Math at MIT. Impressive, to say the least. Of course he doesn't mention what year he graduated or what his degree is in. I don't knoiw maybe I'm from Missouri. I always say "Show Me"!

Vince