|
|
#51
10-10-2005, 08:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pokerstars 10/20NL right now (no cont.)
I hear high tech entrepreneurs never have to work a serious day in their lives. Just sit around playing poker and posting on forums. Maybe that's it.
|
|
#52
10-10-2005, 12:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars 10/20NL right now (no cont.)
tillerman should stick to starcraft and war III.....that is all
|
|
#53
10-10-2005, 01:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars 10/20NL right now (no cont.)
Well here's one for you:
Can anyone truly be dominant in a 10-handed setting? Name me one player. 10-handed and online provides so much protection it is really a game of not screwing up and of being selectively aggressive.
|
|
#55
10-10-2005, 02:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Good Answer
[ QUOTE ]
Well here's one for you: Can anyone truly be dominant in a 10-handed setting? Name me one player. 10-handed and online provides so much protection it is really a game of not screwing up and of being selectively aggressive. [/ QUOTE ] I certainly think that it's possible to be "dominant" in a typical 5/10 or 10/20 full game. Generally, the population consists of tightish, mediocre players who try to play well but don't really know how (this usually involves attempts to fight back, but an underlying reluctance to play big pots without the nuts). The "dominant" force is a good/loose/tricky/aggressive player who reads hands well and knows how to adjust to his opposition. Among the players whom I've seen "dominate" while playing their 'A' game: B Buddy Grandiose TheJoker Strassa Note that the players capable of "domination" are not necessarily the best players or the biggest winners (although sometimes a player will fit both categories). And, there are some players whom I respect greatly who never truly dominate the table; as you said, Matt, for them, it is more about selective aggression. But, as to the question of whether a player can be dominant in a full online ring game, I believe the answer is clearly yes. Thoughts? Mike
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
