Pool Player vs. Golfer vs. Chess Player

[roy_miami]

Let me start off by saying I am the most competitive person I know. When I see interviews on the WPT of the poker greats they all say the same thing "I was extremely competitive as a kid". I always say to myself me too, whether it be card games, board games, sports, anything. I would invent games to pass the time. I would sometimes force my siblings to play monopoly with me through threats of violence. I don't remember ever losing a game of monopoly.

I was from the middle of the boonies and only discovered billiards when I attended college. I loved it, the competitive side of me took over and I had to master it. I got pretty good and when I was on I was unbeatable. The problem with billiadrs is you get to a certain point where you can no longer improve. You either play well that day or you don't. At the end of the day it boils down to physical limitations as to whether or not you do well. So long as you're not a cripple any poker player can master billiards, but only a certain type of billard player can master poker.

Chess I picked up a few years later. I have no idea what my rating would be as I only played live versus friends. I considered myself to be pretty good though, I even had my own manoeuvre that I named after myself. It was unstoppable, within 6 moves i would have your Queen or you would be mated. For the life of me I can't remember or figure out what that move consisted of anymore. Chess is obviously purely a strategy game and I'm not sure how competitive you need to be to be successful at it. I would think good chess players have at least a little competitiveness in them but smarts and the ability to concentrate are more important. I played chess because I would take every opportunity to beat anybody at anything, but I didnt have the concentration required to be great. I found the better my opponent, the better I played. If I was playing a baboon (my brother) he would have a shot at beating me because I could't be bothered with paying attention to defence. the question is, do all chess players have the competitveness and gamble in them to be good at poker? I would say no, but a percentage of good chess players would make for good poker players.

Ahh golf, my passion. Golf is a game where no matter how well you do, you could have done better. No matter how low your handicap is, it can be lower. No matter how low your score was that day, it could have been lower. Golf is one game that will never be mastered by anyone, but no golfer will ever quit trying. Golf is the ultimate game for competitive souls like myself. If it was humanly possible to spend every minute of my life playing golf I would do it. You have 2 types of golfers that can get to a 2 handicap. The natural athletes, the guys that shoot 87 the first time they picked up a set of clubs or the grinders, the guys that work and work and work obsessed with perfecting the game. Obsessed with the impossible. These are the guys that would do well in poker.

Poker and golf have more in common than the other games in that in poker you will rarely play the perfect game. I say rarely because if you get dealt trash all night that perfect game is achievable.

My answer is all 3 can produce winning poker players, but on average the best poker players will be the golfers that grinded their way to the 2 handicap.

[motorholdem]

[ QUOTE ]


Poker and golf have more in common than the other games in that in poker you will rarely play the perfect game. I say rarely because if you get dealt trash all night that perfect game is achievable.

My answer is all 3 can produce winning poker players, but on average the best poker players will be the golfers that grinded their way to the 2 handicap.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree about the "more in common" part.

In golf you need flexibility, coordination, dexterity, feel,etc. Mental toughness is important, but there are no top notch golfers who do not possess the rare physical ability to make a repeatable and reliable and technically correct swing (and these are physical attributes). The mental part then seperates those who can perform under pressure from those golfers who can't.

In chess and poker you need a set of similar cognitive skills, and abosultely no physical attributes. You need a brain that can understand the holistic nature of the game, and a hand (to move the piece, make a bet, click a mouse).

[RagleGumm]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the pool player would be a better gambler, but in the long run the chess player would have been the most successful since he has the one skill that the others can't acquire - intelligence (if we assume that the average chess player is more intelligent than say a pool player). Other skills can be taught through practice.

peace

[/ QUOTE ]

Intelligence isn't a "skill".

[/ QUOTE ]

You are of course correct. Sorry, my mistake.

peace

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
I respectfully disagree about the "more in common" part.

In golf you need flexibility, coordination, dexterity, feel,etc. Mental toughness is important, but there are no top notch golfers who do not possess the rare physical ability to make a repeatable and reliable and technically correct swing (and these are physical attributes). The mental part then seperates those who can perform under pressure from those golfers who can't.


[/ QUOTE ]

I guess what I was trying to say is for me, mentally, they are more similar. I have the same drive to play the perfect game in both, which in golf is impossible and in poker is virtually impossible. Both games have unlimited learning potential. For me I feel the same emotions during each game. A bad shot in golf feels the same as a bad beat in poker. A great golf shot feels like capping the turn with the nuts. A good round feels like a winning session and a bad round feels like a losing session. In both games you really need to keep an even keel. In both games you need to know what your strengths and weaknesses are and you need to play on them. I feel the same butterflys stepping up to the first tee as I do sitting down at the table in a B&M game. I am extremely addicted to both, probably to the point of being obsessed and I will be for the rest of my life.

You are right, physically they are nothing alike, but mentally, for me anyway, they are more alike than you know.

[PairTheBoard]

I assume you are trying to set up comparable skills in chess, pool, and golf. 1600 is an average chess player with 1700 somewhat above average. A 2 handicap golfer is far far above average as a golfer. A pool player who "routinely" runs the table at 9 ball with 6 balls left imo would equate to maybe a 2000 rated "expert" chess player and maybe a 6-8 handicapper in golf. jmo. But let's assume the skill levels are comparable.

If you're talking about which purely game skill would best predict talent at poker I would opine chess ala Howard Ledderman. Yes, pool requires analytical skills as do all sports, but pool is mainly a physical game requiring a good dependable sometimes powerful Stroke with pinpoint accuracy applying various spins on the ball. You can plan your shots and position perfectly but if you can't make the stroke to put the ball where you want it your plans are useless. Golf is even more dominated by various physical shotmaking abilities. Chess however is almost pure analysis both at the table and away from the table - similiar to poker except in people reading skills. All 4 games require good mental stamina.

However, If you're talking about pool and golf "hustlers" it's a different story. You don't have to be the best pool player or golfer around to be a successful Hustler at these games. Hustling is all about reading your opponents and manipulating them into betting as much as possible while giving you the best of it by way of a favorable spot or creative bets during the game. Deception and manipulation of people is primary. In years past many pro poker players came from the game of pool, most notably Bobby Baldwin. I don't know of notable ex golf hustlers. I suspect there are some though. The rest probably all married rich country club divorcees.

PairTheBoard

[Big]

It would have to be the chess player.

Golfers gamble, but that doesn't mean they neccessarily are good at it.

Pool players may gamble also. Their gambling skills involve how they match up. But the successful ones seem to be looking for a lock, rather than an edge that they can exploit. If your pool player is running six balls, I doubt he has enough in reserve to be doing much good at gambling. Many poker players have fond memories of playing poker with billiardists. Mizerak and Joyner are a couple of names that spring to mind.

A 1700 chess player, however, would be familiar with strategic and tactical thinking, and his skills more cerebral than motor--a better match for poker.

[Cyrus]

You offer two jobs (golfer, pool player) where physical and intellectual abilities both play a part, to a certain extent, and then a job (chess man) where only intellectual ability matters, right?

Then you want to know which of the three jobs prepares a person better for another job (poker) that also depends strictly on intellectual ability, is that correct?

I don't know how to put this delicately but, intellectually, it's a no-brainer. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]