GiftofGab, Spirit Rock, Hassan Slask etc.

[Yeti]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree the rap was kind of silly, but honestly, when they set up the clip, I was expecting much worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

[capone0]

You act like there were not great players before books and websites. There are great players from the community and outside the community.

[KaneKungFu123]

you are over estimating the complicity of poker. its not rocket science for fucks sake.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
you are over estimating the complicity of poker. its not rocket science for fucks sake.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'll assume you mean complexity.

your answer is not relevant to my question. whether or not the game is complex does not matter when someone asks why players who dominate the most advanced games are typically self taught.

a simple rebuttal to your assertion is this: if the game is so simple, then you must be able to beat it at any level. if your winrate assertions are indeed true, then you have an adequate BR for 50/100. why are you not playing this game HU (another expectation improvement) all day long against the above players?

fim

[capone0]

fimbul his point is if you study hard enough or just have skill like Stu Ungar, you can dominate games without studying. you act like top flight players like Ivey, Doyle, Greenstein etc. grew up reading about poker, odds are they were mainly just playing poker.

you can definitely get better by reading about poker but to dominate like some of these guys do you have to play alot, and all of these guys play so many hands all day long, thus their domination. there have been many live players who have never read a book about poker, on average they probally don't win as consistantly but there have to be a few who win.

you've watched these guys played, no-one has quanify the high limit no limit games online. you can't play like a rock to win at these games, that just won't work. ABC poker just doesn't work, and most books (no offence) recommend winning ABC poker.

LAG play dominates the Rocks, and I don't believe any writer on 2+2 (I havent' read all the books) advocates the LAG play seen by a lot of these top flight online players.

[Yeti]

[ QUOTE ]
if your winrate assertions are indeed true, then you have an adequate BR for 50/100. why are you not playing this game HU (another expectation improvement) all day long against the above players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's a lot more to be made at lower levels?

[Rosie5]

[ QUOTE ]
whether or not the game is complex does not matter when someone asks why players who dominate the most advanced games are typically self taught.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you know this to be a fact why did you make this post?

I mean i don't know what kind of discussion you expect to have of this. At first I thought the point was to ask if this was true and now im just [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
a simple rebuttal to your assertion is this: if the game is so simple, then you must be able to beat it at any level. if your winrate assertions are indeed true, then you have an adequate BR for 50/100. why are you not playing this game HU (another expectation improvement) all day long against the above players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, please DO TELL!

[Niwa]

There are a few good lag players in MHNL.

[capone0]

Definitely true, I could be wrong most players online are Rocks? Lag players seem to make the most (lose the most at times to). Problem is you can see a stack of 80k in the game, but you don't know if the guy is in for 90k or in for 10k. On Stars it's even tougher cause of the buyin trick to tell whose dominating the games.