Can "non-players" be greatteachers?

[motorholdem]

We see it other sports: the great football coach who didn't have the talent to make it; the great golf coach who could not play anywhere near the level of those who seek his guidance, etc. We have also seen the flipside - the superstar with tons of talent and instinct and couldn't teach a sole anything if his life depended on it...

I was wondering if anyone knows of personal or other examples of the same thing in poker -the great non-playing teacher. Someone who can analyze play at the highest level, and indentify gaps and recommend fixes, but for one reason or another are not succesful players themselves.


Maybe it is anxiety, or maybe they can't perform under pressure, maybe they don't have the "gamble" in them, or it could be a host of things.

I'm just wondering if anyone has run into such a person.
Are there valuable human resources out there that are not being tapped into because they are not top level players?

Thoughts??

[David Sklansky]

While theoretically remotely possible, no such animal actually exists. As would be expected.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
While theoretically remotely possible, no such animal actually exists. As would be expected.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pure unadulterated BS!

There is the axiom "Those who can, Do. Those who can't, Teach."

How many history teachers have fought in great battles, made speeches to Congress, negotiated treaties, etc? These teachers can teach history, political science or whatever and help train people who will eventually accomplish these tasks.

How many sports coaches have won big events? How many have trained people who have?

On a side note DS, are you related to Aldous Huxley (author of Brave New World)? From some of your posts in general, I get the idea (possibly erroneous) that if you had the power you would tie everyones' lifechoice selections and opportunities to their IQ.

Valid or off the mark?

[reubenf]

[ QUOTE ]
There is the axiom "Those who can, Do. Those who can't, Teach."

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an axiom? Hahahahahahaha.... phew, okay.

[ QUOTE ]
How many history teachers have fought in great battles blah blah blah other non-poker examples

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is a different beast than those examples.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is a different blah blah than those examples.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yada Yada, same principle. You haven't refuted my assertions yet. Do you see why?

Keep trying. Or better yet, put the book down. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Reef]

wow, you got the DS as a first response. I bow down to your posting prowess.

[theBruiser500]

no

[SNOWBALL138]

I think a smart non-player could write a book that is better than Play Poker like the Pros by Phil Hellmuth.
You would just use a lot of resources. It would be like a research project. Would that make you a great teacher? NO!

[OrangeKing]

I think the difference is in the nature of sports (by which I mean, physical sports) as compared to say, poker or chess or other "mind" games. In sports, there is both a mental and physical aspect. If you understand football completely, but just don't have the physical tools to compete against NFL athletes, you can still share your wisdom with players. In poker, there's just the mental aspect (for the most part - there are other factors too, of course) - if you don't have the proper knowledge, you can't teach, and if you had the proper knowledge, you could play at least reasonably well.

On the other hand, it's not a perfect corelation between playing ability and teaching ability. I'm not too familiar with poker teachers, but some of the best chess teachers are "merely" masters, and not among the best players in the world.

[Shaman]

Management consultant/guru Peter Drucker has never run a company his entire life.