[SumZero]

[ QUOTE ]
So what you guys think? Let the flaming begin!

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are framing the question in a way that can lead you and others to make the mistake of catagorical thinking.

Nature or nurture?

Evolution or creation science?

Either I have the straight flush or I'm bluffing.

Framing things as either-or questions causes people to evaluate things as if A is more likely than B then A is true while if B is more likely than A then B is true. This is as opposed to thinking that aspects of both A and B may be true, or the truth may be C.

So what am I getting at?

The people who appear to be stars on the WPT are very likely a combination between great talents and great hype (lucky) and great environment (friends with other good players who they can talk things over with).

I mean why is the average 2+2 poster a better poker player than a randomly selected poker player? Because they seek out more information and because they think things over away from the table and can discuss with people and get different points of view. If you had the opportunity to talk poker strategy regularly with top players you would undoubtably improve your game (case in point: Ben Affleck). Who knows what you'd max out at in terms of skill? Maybe you'd be world class. Maybe you'd "merely" move to the point where you could regularly cash in local $100 tournaments. But even if you were world class in skill you may never reach the final table in a WPT or WSOP event in the next 5 years as luck plays a huge roll in it too.

A number of people recommend that if you want to get better in poker the best thing you can do is make friends with one or two other serious poker players who play at your levels and all talk about hands and situations as you all move up. A number of the famous players have done that and reached the world class status. A number of 2+2ers have had success with that, even if not all of them are destined to become world class.