Does PP really have some of the best SNG players in the World?

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Desdia,

I think that you need to define "best in the world".

Success in poker is usually measured in terms of money. It's a game about money. In my opinion, the "best poker players in the world" are those that make the most money playing poker.

So, if you ask "Does Party have some of the best SNG players in the world?"--- the answer is almost certainly yes! The top SNG players at Party (and skins) definitely make more money than at almost any other place-- partly because of the quick structure and availability of games.

Regarding the question of whether avoiding playing at a table filled with a bunch of good players is a demonstration that you're not a top player---- If success is measured in dollars, then the best players SHOULD practice good table selection.

It's possible to define "best in the world" in a different manner, and I think that is where there is room for argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

just because one poker player at x-site makes more than another player at y-site because of a quicker game or availability of the game(s) does'nt make you the "best" at anything. if you wanna measure SUCCESS in terms of dollar$ (excercising table selection), then that's another matter. that also does'nt mean that you're the "best" at anything. if you made all that money playing against rich players who were weak in skill but had money to gamble, then what does that prove? that you beat out a bunch of weak, rich players.
i'd feel fortunate to have made that money; however, i certainly would'nt be walking around proclaiming i'm "one of the best poker players" because i can pick tables and because i make alot of money off sub-par players. nor would i proclaim my SNG prowess simply because i'm great under a quick blind structure and a game starts at my site every minute.

[viennagreen]

I never know how to read your posts Desdia--- and maybe I should just *NOT* read them, but...

I defined what I thought was a good measure of who "the best SNG players in the world are", and then answered your question.

I invited a different opinion/definition of how to measure "the-best-in-the-world"-ness.

You disagree-- but you either didn't understand the challenge I presented, or were unable to meet it.

Another question:
Player X has an ITM of 60%, and an ROI of 10%.
Player Y has an ITM of 40%, and an ROI of 30%.
Both players play at the same level. Which player is better?

I would say Player Y is better. Player X finishes in-the-money more consistently, but Player Y makes much more money. (which, I think, adds support to my general view that the "best-ness" of a poker player is measured by net dollars won)

**
So really-- my challenge to you was "How do YOU define "best poker player", and why?

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I had watched the histories posted by Daliman and it was eerily, actually downright scary how close our styles are. I would like to get a chance to play with him and some of the others...


[/ QUOTE ]

Careful what you wish for...

BTW, one sng would prove nothing,(although it might be fun) . Ten good players would havee to play at LEAST 250 times together all at the same table to get a good idea of who is better than who.

[3rdEye]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"surely, the best don't shy away from playing anyone"

This is poker, not baseball. When given a chance at playing the yankees at home and all you are worried about is ticket sales then you play the yankees at home. When you have to win to eat/pay rent/enjoy your life you invite the detriot tigers to town. Even if you Can beat the yankees 6/10, why not just play detroit for the 7/10? If your only goal is to be the best that is one thing, if you are playing for money then your opposition will be entirely different.

[/ QUOTE ]

if your goal is to simply earn the most money or ROI by playing the weakest opposition, that does'nt make you one of the best in my book. that simply means you're trying to earn the most money you can in the easiest way possible.

there are many players on all the sites who do this at every buy-in level where recognizing who the good players are and avoiding them is a key element to maximizing their earn rate. however, that does'nt make them the best at anything. one could argue that they developed good earning strategies based on some of the factors Daliman pointed out (in respect to the site they play) on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't table selection one of the criterion by which we judge a player's skill?

[/ QUOTE ]

we're not discussing skill, per se. skill, i'm already assuming, is included in when you say, "best player(s)". i don't consider table selection any kind of skill. if i know w-x-y and z players are regulars at the $200 level and have extraordinary skill, then me choosing not to sit down at tournament table whatever is'nt a skill---- it's "commonsense". you don't need to be a rocket scientist or some poker "theorist" to figure that one out (nor do you need Theory Of Poker to tell you that). if you know your earn rate is gonna be affected by sitting down and playing with them, then you simply don't join that table or that SNG.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose you're right. It depends on how we define "skill." If we define poker skill as one's ability to make money playing poker, however, I think table selection is one of the determinants of skill.

In other words, if two players are equally skilled, given that they are playing against the same set of opponents, then the player who is better at table selection will have an advantage, making him more "skilled."

This is a semantic debate, however, so I don't think it merits going any further.