A brave new world for poker pros? Yeah right.

[Raiser]

[ QUOTE ]
The bluffees couldn't be reached for comment, because they were still at the table, playing poker.


[/ QUOTE ]

This line is great. Nice work.

[MRBAA]

Look at just about any pro sport before big money and publicitity got involved. The level of play was much lower in large part because the pool of athletes was much lower.

Think of pro hoops in the 20s-50s -- most of the players were from NY and a few other urban areas and black players generally were relegated to their own leagues. As the money and popularity grew, the talent pool expanded to the point where good athletes are now taking up basketball all over the world. And quality coaching and b-ball knowledge is widely available as never before.

The same thing is happening in poker -- loads of new players are pouring in and better teaching/learning is available. This is good for the game overall, but it means the best of these new players are moving up to limits like 20-40 and higher after beating low limits. Most won't be winners, but may STILL BE BETTER THAN THE OLD WINNERS. And the new winners are likely to be MUCH BETTER than all but the best from the past.

Sort of like George Mikan and the old Lakers trying to take on Shaq and the new. Mikan might make an NBA team today, most of his teammates probably couldn't even start at a major college.

[tolbiny]

the difference between poker and basketball is that in poiler its like they expand the legue every time someone wants to play. You really arent competing against the pros in the same way, so there should be enough room for all the old pros plus the new ones with the larger pool of money involved. If you were a pro and now you cannont beat the game the only possibility is that your game needs adjusting- we know this because there are still people out there makeing a living playing poker.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
I played for a couple of months online before I got back out to play a live game and it was shocking. It was like someone took the blinders off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hearty agreement.

The ability to play bulk hands is an insane learning tool.

On the other hand, there are things that live poker gives you too.

I was talking with poster, nascent pro, and all around classy guy JoeMatty at the Borgata this week about how playing online can keep me from plugging leaks in my game. When I'm multitablng 5/10 short games, I rarely have time to sit and mull over every mistake I make. I come back and pick up some of them, but some leaks just slide off since I have another hand to get involved with so quickly.

I played about 45 hours of live 10/20 last week, and my game improved by light years. Having 30 minutes to sit around and mull over every bet I could have had if I had played optimally was a HUGE learning tool. It was like I was looking at my game with a microscope instead of my glasses.

The chance to watch the habits of stronger players while I was playing was also a great experience. When I'm online, I don't let myself get "tutored" enough by the strongest players I play with.

Anyway, for what it's worth I think that a combination of the two experineces is the best way for me to improve. Plus, splashing chips around is fun.

scrub

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
I was talking with poster, nascent pro, and all around classy guy JoeMatty at the Borgata this week about how playing online can keep me from plugging leaks in my game. When I'm multitablng 5/10 short games, I rarely have time to sit and mull over every mistake I make. I come back and pick up some of them, but some leaks just slide off since I have another hand to get involved with so quickly.

I played about 45 hours of live 10/20 last week, and my game improved by light years. Having 30 minutes to sit around and mull over every bet I could have had if I had played optimally was a HUGE learning tool. It was like I was looking at my game with a microscope instead of my glasses.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hellew!

Thank you for this observation!

al

[B-Man]

NM

[bernie]

It may be covered already, but here goes.

At my old room I used to watch/hear overlimit guys complain when they sat in a LL game how they couldnt beat LL games because of the players. They needed more 'predictable' players. So that became their texture of choice. Some learned how to play it rather well. Well enough to beat their normal opponents. One trick ponies.

But now comes the poker boom. With it comes more money/players able to blow chips at theses higher limit players who either forgot how to beat the typical LL texture or never could anyways. They dont know how to adjust so they blame it on the players instead of looking at their own games.

It's not necesarily better players coming in. Yeah, that happens, but most players i've seen just plain suck. But with those types of players/textures comes higher variance game. Which means you may need a roll higher than 300BB. Which some higher limit guys aren't used to. So again, well ingrained in their one style, it couldnt be their fault, they'll say again. The new guys just dont know how to play.

I dont understand either how more players coming in, more games to choose from, more loose money makes tougher games overall. For every one decent player coming in, there are countless donators.

I also wonder if many of the players who complain about this aren't older guys who like sitting in their little rock garden. Boy, now those are the games we all yearn for!

Cya

b

[natedogg]

PokerBabe, you're talking about Vegas mid-limit winners who have failed to adjust to the games now that they play more like aggressive low-limit california games. Welcome to low-limit variance guys. The swings are enormous.

But that's neither here nor there.

I was talking about the big name tourney pros dropping like flies and everyone all over the internet (and probably the media too) claiming this is a signal of the new order for poker.

I'm saying no, the tourney pros are indeed great players, the game has not passed them by. There are just many more great players out there than people give credit for (including you). Midlimit vegas games are entirely irrelevant to the discussion but for what it's worth, I think it's funny that all these "pro" 20-40 players can't win anymore because of all the suckouts. Damn that's funny.

And if these new terrible players are playing in a way that the pros must call the river more, maybe they aren't playing so bad eh? In the case of your example, I believe you actually ARE talking about people who have let the game pass them by.

But for the famous tourney pros, I think it's just silly to assert they are dinosaurs. It's just that media and many vociferous onliner folks have long under-estimated how many good players are out there that nobody has heard of.

Greg Raymer case in point. do you think he's heading to the final table because Chris Ferguson and D.Negreanu and Johnny Chan suddenly forgot how to play, or maybe it's just that he can play too.

natedogg

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Hi natedoggie....

I am thrilled ahout Fossilman. He is an outstanding player and has worked hard on his game to get to that final table.

As for the midlimit boyz here in Vegas, they are not blundering idiots by any means. They are not failing to adjust anymore than the wannabes are. It works both ways, you see?

LGPG,

Babe [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[Boris]

4 of nine players at final table qualified through Pokerstars. Maybe those Internet crazies arent so bad after all?