|
|
#221
12-09-2004, 11:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: as well you should be (ashamed), i don\'t expect anything
[ QUOTE ]
my use of the words or term "dominated hand(s)", from my understanding, was'nt meant in any kind of technical term way. it's not like i'm looking up the glossary term in the back of some poker book saying, "i'm gonna use this 'technical' term in my defense against Greg, even though i don't know the meaning". [/ QUOTE ] From now on, please do not use any "technical" poker terms with Des. Don't confuse him with terms such as raise, flop, fold or super advanced terms such as check-raise. We're getting way too close to sounding like a bunch of tech manual junkies. I can understand a noob not knowing what some terms that are used all the time on here mean (I remember not knowing what it meant to "flop a set" back in the day) but this one truly takes the cake. 
|
|
#222
12-10-2004, 03:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: as well you should be (ashamed), i don\'t expect anything
Cola, while some of the stuff you say is pretty helpful and true ripping ripping Desdia for being "obsessed with results" is pretty silly when you stop to think about it. The original thread referred to the poker playing ability of Raymer did it not?? It didnt ask whether Raymer was overatted as a : swell guy, poster on 2+2,fossil collector, poker theorist,....etc etc etc. The point is, in order for us to ascertain where he is skill wise arent results gonna have too play a major role ??
|
|
#223
12-10-2004, 04:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: as well you should be (ashamed), i don\'t expect anything
It's not unfair to criticise Desdia for it. He has said it over and over and over again.
You have not, however..until now. I never asserted that was the point of your post. Desdia was talking about results being the key factor, though. I responded to that, and a lot of little sub-conversations have gone on in this thread. No point singling that one out. My point all along is that we are in no position to know or judge Greg's play. Recent results don't matter, therefore I can't really know how he plays. I think I said that in my second or third post (long ago) in this thread. Results oriented thinking is bad. Desdia claims it is good. Take from that what you will. [EDIT]- In case any of you missed it in the obscure sup bro thread: 
|
|
#225
12-10-2004, 04:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: as well you should be (ashamed), i don\'t expect anything
So baseball is the same as gambling? Wow.. that's news.
Results may matter in sports, but in gambling results oriented thinking is a very bad thing. Your comparison is silly.
|
|
#227
12-10-2004, 04:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: as well you should be (ashamed), i don\'t expect anything
Did I ever say they were irrelevant? I'm pretty sure I said you can't judge results in such a small time frame, or something to that effect.
How is baseball like gambling? Your insistance on results being a key for determining one's skill in poker is silly. You could theoretically play perfectly in a B&M card room for almost 2 years and not show a profit. That is basically what I have read that Mason has stated in the past. It's unlikely, but still possible. With major tournaments it's even more likely you will not "win a big one" every year or some such nonsense. But you're right... it's exactly like baseball.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
