|
|
#1
10-24-2005, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
I had a discussion with a buddy of mine. I said if you took 2 blank slates when it came to poker. I mean they know nothing, not even the rules. They have the same intelligence. Now you take 1 of them and let them play(practice?) for one month. Then after that month who would have an edge? Or would there be no edge at all?
|
|
#3
10-24-2005, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
[ QUOTE ]
Any kind of extra experience is an edge. Knowing that AA beats KK is an edge. [/ QUOTE ] Your example does not even come close to proving that "any kind of experience is an edge". Vince
|
|
#4
10-24-2005, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
"2 clueless but one with experience"
Your title is incorrect. The one with experience is no longer clueless because he'll have (assuming some intelligence) picked up a lot about the game in his month playing it.
|
|
#6
10-24-2005, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
well of course you are right. But my buddy seems not to think so. So i wrote this to show him he is insane. He asked me to put this here to make me look stupid. But i feel in some way it backfired. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#7
10-24-2005, 08:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
[ QUOTE ]
well of course you are right. [/ QUOTE ] Really? Suppose this fellow that played for a month watched Aces get beaten by Kings 9 out of 10 times? Would he not conclude from his "experience" that kings were a better hand than Aces? [ QUOTE ] He asked me to put this here to make me look stupid [/ QUOTE ] You don't need my help to look stupid. You do a good job on your own. Vince
|
|
#8
10-24-2005, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
You assume he is a moron. Nobody said these guys were morons. Just said they know nothing about poker. I think most people wouold figure out after a month of play that AA is bette hand than kk regardless how it did in 10 hands. Btw even if he thought kk was better than AA he did learn somthing. That KK and AA are the types of hands you should play. As people play those hands more than 72 off. Thanks for helping my argument. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I guess you do a good job lookin stupid too ay?
|
|
#9
10-24-2005, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
[ QUOTE ]
You assume he is a moron. [/ QUOTE ] No I don't. Besides we are not discussing intelligence. We are discussing "experience". If his experience during this period is taken from watching someone win yet play incorrectly that is what he will learn. People like you don't see anything wrong with that. Vince
|
|
#10
10-24-2005, 09:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 clueless but one with experience who is better?
Yes you are assuming he is of low intelligence if u think he won't figure out that AA is better than kk. And you are right this dicussion shouldnt be about intelligence. So why are you trying to make it about that? To cover your weak argument?
Yes! its about experience! and with experience he will figure out hand rankings and have an edge period! And if he learns from someone who plays better than he does he will improve even if the person they learn from is a losing player. Its guys like you that dont understand this simple concept. Its common sense!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
