congrats. you guys win

[rockythecat99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let me use an analogy here. Let’s say Poker is like….oh, maybe, say, ….an auto race (I just made that up now).

The guy who is the race leader is like the chip leader. The guys who are several laps behind are like the shortstacks. Guys in the middle of the pack are middle stacks.

Your comments on the relative value of red and orange stacks is like saying, “well, the guys who are way behind in the race and way ahead in the race can both accelerate real quick ‘cause no one is near them, while the guys in the middle don’t have that flexibility”. That’s true, but what you miss here that having those advantages inherently gives up something even more important: position in the race. Because if you are several laps behind in the auto race, you still need to catch up and pass the cars in the middle if you ever want to finish first.

So the advantages that you correctly point out about being a shortstack are more than offset by the disadvantages inherent in being a shortstack to start with. And being able to move up at a greater rate than the middle stacks is more than offset by the fact that you have that much farther to travel.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok. well, i'll try to apply it to your analogy. if you were in the middle of the pack, and i gave you a choice. you can use a nitro booster that will either shoot you out inot the lead, or stall your can for a minute, which will wind you up in the back of the pack. would you be willing to take that gamble? i think that a lot of times it would probably improve your overall chances in the race, esp if the prize pool in that race were particularly top heavy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Omg did he just say stall his car in a race??? Pf please just stop man. I am not trying to insult you but this is ridiculous.

[stew77]

PFK,
i agree 100% with your comments and the way you feels towards the forum. Your only option is to suck it up and try and get what your looking for out of it. The fact is that this site has so many Egos, unjustified and not, that for every credible and helpful post you read, you will just as easily find 2or3 useless rants/ego boosters.
Many of the "top" players have complete disregard for those starting out a the point they were once at. I have sent PMs to different players, and I hope these posters dont mind if I say who, but AZK and Greg Raymer were the only ones to reply, no matter how big or small the question .
It is a tough situation, bringing all these different personalities and poker minds together for one common goal - to get better.
I just believe that many posters could be a bit more positive and not be so ignorant sometimes.

stew

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let me use an analogy here. Let’s say Poker is like….oh, maybe, say, ….an auto race (I just made that up now).

The guy who is the race leader is like the chip leader. The guys who are several laps behind are like the shortstacks. Guys in the middle of the pack are middle stacks.

Your comments on the relative value of red and orange stacks is like saying, “well, the guys who are way behind in the race and way ahead in the race can both accelerate real quick ‘cause no one is near them, while the guys in the middle don’t have that flexibility”. That’s true, but what you miss here that having those advantages inherently gives up something even more important: position in the race. Because if you are several laps behind in the auto race, you still need to catch up and pass the cars in the middle if you ever want to finish first.

So the advantages that you correctly point out about being a shortstack are more than offset by the disadvantages inherent in being a shortstack to start with. And being able to move up at a greater rate than the middle stacks is more than offset by the fact that you have that much farther to travel.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok. well, i'll try to apply it to your analogy. if you were in the middle of the pack, and i gave you a choice. you can use a nitro booster that will either shoot you out inot the lead, or stall your can for a minute, which will wind you up in the back of the pack. would you be willing to take that gamble? i think that a lot of times it would probably improve your overall chances in the race, esp if the prize pool in that race were particularly top heavy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now let's say that all those nitro boosters do is bring you to the middle of the pack again, where they can't be used again (to make the analogy fit a little tighter). Not only that, but...say...40% of the time, they cause you to crash (and 40% is being lenient). Thus, being in the back of the pack allowed you the opportunity to use those boosters, but at a risk, and the very best result was that you're back in the middle.

[Stipe_fan]

I think everybody needs to step back and take a deep breath.

Firstly, I read more than I write on this board. But what I am seeing is multiple personalities of the posters clashing here.

MLG has never minced words. Could he be a little nicer when he gives his reply, maybe. I don't know him personally. Someone mentioned egos at work here. I don't think it is a ego thing. It is just him. All his posts have a matter-of-fact-ness to them.

If we all are a little more positive in our posts I think it would incite a more instructive, rather destructive, board. Not positive in the way of always agreeing with the poster, just be less derisive when posting.

Stipe

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
MLG has never minced words. Could he be a little nicer when he gives his reply, maybe. I don't know him personally. Someone mentioned egos at work here. I don't think it is a ego thing. It is just him. All his posts have a matter-of-fact-ness to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

as i had said before, it really was more frustration that anything else for me. and MLG wasn't one of the posters who was frustrating me. he maybe had 1 or 2 posts in there that were short and uninformative, but for the most part his disputes with my ideas were done with some thought, and rationale. actually trying to help me. my extreme frustration was with posters who would make several posts, with their strongest points being, "12 is bigger than 6, you are retarded" those posts server ZERO purpose, other than to cause problems. and nobody gets anything positive from them. these people who make no effort to understand the ideas are annoying and have only negative effefts on this forum. MLG is def not one of them.

[Jurollo]

While I understand where you are coming from this forum is far from what you depicted. In fact, I think the MTT is the best forum on this site for listening to, and analyzing new ideas. Sometimes ideas come along and get shot down by many people for various reasons but that is just how it goes. Most of the posters here are very young, i seem like an elder at only 22, so sometimes things become slightly immature in the way they are handled. I think you really need to take a look at where MTT was a year ago and where it is now, you'll see it is a much better place for strategy and less for just sweat threads. I would like to think Lloyd, Chief, TTIU and myself have a little part to do with that. Just rethink things, ideas are always welcome here and will always be debated with vigor. Keep posting!
~Justin

[Cactus Jack]

I see people disagreeing without being too disagreeable.

Ever been on RPG?

[pfkaok]

thanks jurollo. point well taken. lately i've spent most of my time in this forum, but i've been a regular on other forums for a while, and its true that a lot of others are much worse. to be honest i think that most of my beef comes from the fact that lately i've spent a lot more time in this forum than i ever have in any single forum. for some reason since i've been playing more MTTs, i've found that they appeal to me more than any other form i've played. so i've had much more of a desire to put in tons of hours, and really challenge myself to keep pushing my game. but it just seems like so many people on here are very unreceptive to anything that challenges "common knowledge"

this is mostly the medium strength, pretty good players, who get more satisfaction from proving others wrong then they do from learning, and challenging themselves. you, MLG, and the truly TOP posters, aren't like that, and as gergery put, the fact that you aren't likely is a huge factor in why you guys are the best.

and i know what you mean too. i'm 25, and a lot of times i feel like i'm an old man around here.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

and i know what you mean too. i'm 25, and a lot of times i feel like i'm an old man around here.

[/ QUOTE ]

25? You've still got milk on your breath! I'm a crusty-old 31.

Think of it this way. They're kids. Kids are rude, and think they're infallible. I know that I had a nasty habit of stating my informed opinion as a proven fact when I was 19. Why should the members of this forum be any different?

But they're smart kids, and have valuable things to say. Just ignore the puffery.

That being said, to the kids (defined as anyone younger than I am): Learn some manners. Manners will get you places in life that no amount of money ever will.

[PrayingMantis]

It is never easy to present some kind of revolutionary and non-conventional idea, and to be fiercely attacked because of it. It also takes guts, and I have no problem admiting it. However, this has absolutely nothing to do with being right or wrong. And in this specific discussion you were wrong, and was proven to be wrong time and again by many people, in a very logical, informative, and methodical way. You were also flamed, sometimes in a harsh manner, but that's just the reality of on-line discussion.

Moreover, people always feel like martyrs of some kind when they come up with new ideas, with regard to anything, and are getting attacked and criticized - but the thing is that the huge huge majority of these news and "revolutionary" ideas are simply wrong. Very very rarely, in any field, a revolutioary idea turns out to be correct. That's life.

If you think that your theory is correct, I don't understand why you are "giving up". No way you should give up, this is completely crazy. The problem, of course, is that your theory is self-contradictory in many aspects, and at points also simply illogical. That's why big parts of the discussion were about logic, and not about poker (as you would have "liked" it to be) because the LOGIC behind many of your points is flawed, and this has nothing to do with poker in particular.

[ QUOTE ]
in all honestly, if TOP had never been written, and a young player came on this site trying to share some brilliant, new insightful theory, like FTOP, but typed it up in a slightly unlear manner, i have no doubt that he would get flamed on these boards.

[/ QUOTE ]

FTOP is extremely intuitive, I would even say trivial. And in fact, I think that any player with a basic understanding of the game and EV should get to it, in some form, without the "help" of Sklansky. It's also funny IMO that it is titled a "thoerem", to give it some pretentions mathematicl flavour, while in fact it is just a rather banal notion about the nature of this game - but this has to do with Sklansky's ego more than anything else, I guess.

Anyway, I don't understand why you say on this post that "we win", and you supposedly "give up", while it's very clear that you believe that your ideas are still very valid and all the people who criticize/flame you are wrong or misunderstanding you. Either admit you are wrong, or keep "fighting" for them... I don't understand this "third option": not talking about it anymore as a "protest" against this forum?