GiftofGab, Spirit Rock, Hassan Slask etc.

[37offsuit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He did a very GAY "poker rap" during the last WSOP circuit event last week on ESPN.

He lost respect amongst the entire poker community with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Losing respect for a poker player because of his/her non poker related hobby, whether it is rap or male kitten nosehair fondling, is not only moronic, but probably -EV if you play against them.

[/ QUOTE ]


HUH? What are you talking about. I didn't say I lost respect of his poker playing ability. I lost respect for him as a person.

The Great, Unstoppable Prahlad Friedman.. So revered and honored in these halls, has turned out to be a complete and total...... DORK!



[/ QUOTE ]

I know, I just wanted to talk about my male kitten nosehair fondling fetish.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi fimbul,

I promise you this is not personal, but WTF are you talking about, man?

[ QUOTE ]
These players who are truly beating the biggest and hardest games never seem to come from poker communities.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK; 2 of the 3 named in your OP's subject most certainly DO come from poker communities. Prahlad was one of the most active members of RGP (ever heard of that forum?) at the same time as Jesus Ferguson and Howard Lederer were active there. This was only a few years ago; you are young.

Gift of Gab posted a lot here in the past; one can only assume that he lurked when he wasn't posting. I don't know about the Scandanavian dude, but see the next paragraph.

Finally, there are many "poker communities" that are off your radar (I mean ones even more obscure than the top-secret RGP). Everywhere there is serious poker played, there are groups of players who bounce ideas off each other and push each other to become better. I know this is true in Sweden, I know it's true in Madison, WI, I know it's true in Charlottesville, VA. Diablo plays in the Bay Area, right? He's friends with Tommy Angelo; think they ever talk about poker?

If your premise wasn't completely faulty to begin with, I think a reasonable answer would be that the ability to rise to the very top of poker is derived mostly from extreme talent. These super-talented players would probably do even better if they studied, but they possess skills that you can't learn from books, and this is what sets them apart. This is how the players from older generations (who didn't have access to good books and who haven't subsequently read any) continue to succeed against poker's "new breed" of math wonk.

[/ QUOTE ]

cero-

the point of this post was not "these players don't discuss hands etc, therfore they are better players" the point of it was to pose the qustion: does there come a point in raw talent where the accelerated pragmatic learning of posting/reading in a large poker community is actually detrimental to the long-term development of a world class player/thinker.

thus far people have entirely misinterpreted the whole point. it's easy to look and see "these guys don't discuss hands" when in fact im asking a theoretic question about what might happen if the raw talent that will/could beomce the next ivey or friedman became an habitual 2+2er.

obviously you and the rest of the forum seem to support the notion that this forum in particular is just the latest iteration of something that has been going on even amongst great players for quite some time. that's fine. simply because i posed a somewhat inflammatory question doesnt mean i'm personally of the opinon that true talent is better served by introspection than by communalism.

fim

ps- i have no experience with RGP outside of reading paulp's stuff there. i had no idea PF posted there, such information certainly changes the question WRT him.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
Then, if we examine the subset of people who DO have the potential to become experts on their own, I still think that books and 2+2 are beneficial, because such people are also generally smart enough to avoid misapplying concepts. So, generally, experts are going to end up as experts no matter what path they choose.

[/ QUOTE ]

ML4L-

thank you for giving a real response. this has been the kind of opinion i was hoping to get from the forum in general.

fim

[TheMainEvent]

[ QUOTE ]
What name did Prahlad post under in RGP?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ML4L]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then, if we examine the subset of people who DO have the potential to become experts on their own, I still think that books and 2+2 are beneficial, because such people are also generally smart enough to avoid misapplying concepts. So, generally, experts are going to end up as experts no matter what path they choose.

[/ QUOTE ]

ML4L-

thank you for giving a real response. this has been the kind of opinion i was hoping to get from the forum in general.

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I don't think that a lot of people (myself included) knew what you were getting at initially... I also think that the possibly-faulty assumption that there is a disproportionally large number of "self-taught" players at the higher levels threw people off track.

Mike

[Dr. StrangeloveX]

Everyone seems to assume that PF is still a winning player. On PT I have 27k hands of 25-50 (down 122k or 24 buy-ins), 6.6k 50-100 (down 108k or 10 buy-ins), +1500 hands of 200-400 and 300-600 (down 56k).

Have any of you ever run that bad?

[Yeti]

[ QUOTE ]
Have any of you ever run that bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[Dr. StrangeloveX]

Wow.

At the very least his winrate is suspect, because if he was just dominating (like 10PTBB/100) such a run (even given the high variance) would be extremely rare.

[mythrilfox]

cero,

Do you know under what handle Friedman posted there?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you know under what handle Friedman posted there?

[/ QUOTE ]

Prahlad may have posted, or cero may have been thinking of Patri Friedman. In either case, his points (and KKF's, ML4L's, etc.) remain correct.