|
|
#31
05-30-2005, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
"never the less... i still think that a successful career tournament player at a given buy-in level is more skilled than the equivalent limit cash game player, assuming that they end up with equal ROI. in other words, it is harder to maintain long term success in tournaments than in cash games at the the same $ level. "
A sound set of reasons as to WHY you think this would go a long way. I think a lot of the problem actually is thus: even if consistently turning a profit in MTTs was equally as hard as it was in Cash Games, there would still be a subset of players who had won large amounts of money who were weaker players, or even losing players. This sort of thing is almost unheard of in cash games. 
|
|
#32
05-30-2005, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
i have to agree with ISh in the long run cash games are a better way to resolve whos better. When u get to the end of a tournament theres people that are forced to do things they wouldnt in a cash game like go allin on short stacks and etc and raising blinds. Im a winning player online at 2/4 and i sometimes play in home games against horrible players and imean horrible, and well play a single table style NL tourney with the blinds raising up everyso often and ive lost more than ive won.(over a small sample size albeit)and id bet my life that if we were playing cash games id kill thes e same people over the long run.
|
|
#33
05-30-2005, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Different Games
[ QUOTE ]
Tournaments and cash games a just different. One isn't superior to the other because its like comparing apples to oranges. [/ QUOTE ] You do realize this logic could be applied to high limit and low limit games right? 400/800 holdem requires a different skill set than 1/2 holdem. The obvious follows: A player beating 400/800 is MUCH more likely able to also beat 1/2 than someone beating 1/2 being able to beat 400/800. Same thing for tournaments. The best cash players can also be the best tourney players. The converse is not true.
|
|
#34
05-30-2005, 05:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
[ QUOTE ]
i've never heard of the asian guy. what has he won/done? [/ QUOTE ] I read in a Card Player article that he was voted the third most successful cash game player. This was back in 2001, and it goes to show how much things have changed sine.
|
|
#35
05-30-2005, 05:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
I semi agree with Barry. Although, his facts are straight i dont agree with his reasoning. I think its harder to have a high win percentage in tournaments, because once you're out, you're out. But in cash games, you can keep playing and making investments in order to recieve a return. That said, its obvious that cash gamers make more money. Also, playing tournaments is almost completely different from playing cash games. Therefore, people who play tournaments try to play cash games, they inherently lose. So its true that poker players who play cash games get a lot more experience and can pick up pots in tournaments, in the long run, a tournament player will still beat the cash player in tournaments over time. So i dont really think that either one is better or worse.
|
|
#36
05-30-2005, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
Okay, what are the odds of any of the last three WSOP main event winners leaving Greenstein's game with their shirts much less winning money?
If you watched Moneymaker's run to the gold I'm sure you noticed a few very questionable calls that gave him that "skill required to make it" big stack at the final table. My first >$1 MTT had 650+ players, I finished in the top 40. My fifth >$1 MTT was 500+ players, I finished 3rd (went out flopped set over flopped set). What does that have to do with anything? Well, I'm about 5x the player now that I was then and I've never finished better in a MTT than 3rd.
|
|
#38
05-30-2005, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
I kinda disagree with Greenstein. Yes they are all good players but what about others such as johnny chan, t.j cloutier, and even lederer
|
|
#39
05-30-2005, 06:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
[ QUOTE ]
He was at the final table of the first televised WSOP event last year. The NL Hold 'em event that the British Backgammon player won. He ran into quads against that snaggle tooth dude. [/ QUOTE ] No, that was David Chiu. Chau Giang won the PLO event at the WSOP.
|
|
#40
05-30-2005, 06:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Greenstein - Good Article.
I totally forgot to mention my favorite player as well, daniel n. I totally think that the players such as dan harrington who consistantly make it to final tables year after year are better than the ppl who win the wsop once and never win but the consistant ones are better than the cash players. I think that tourny's take more skill than cash games.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
