Dr. Al, I have a question for you, and anyone else who wants to answer

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the general ideas about confidence and balls, etc etc.

But I also wanted to point out this scenario:

100k poker-players with an equal amount of skills and all of them played the same amount and all decided to take a 'shot' at the next level every once in awhile...and then maybe move up again if they are fortunate to succeed there...etc etc.
Well, you would likely have a handful of these 'equal strength' players catch the right cards at the perfect times and move their way up higher and higher.

I think that neverwin thinks on a level that is a step or two above most of us (or his opponents) but, you also have to consider that there is a great deal of luck involved.


Just like if you ran a simulation of the WSOP main-event 1 million times, you would have some nobody come from out of nowhere playing in his first live-event and win the thing just by being TOO aggressive and catching good cards at the right times.


But the topic of what makes this GREAT poker-players tick is an interesting one.
ggbman made a post of his success in poker (in the general forum). Here's an 18 year old kid who's been playing poker for a couple years and has had terrific success. He's articulate and seeme extremely mature in his approach to poker.

I think in cases like ggbman and neverwin and others it's not JUST a case of drive and studying and courage to push the big money around....there's also a very basic element that some people are simply smarter than others too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that MicroBob hit on it pretty clean here. It isn't that these players are so much better than the rest of us at birth. There is a ton of luck. Look at Greg Raymer. Sure he was a great player etc before, but he never would have had the year he had last year had it not been for his WSOP win. He is now a bonafide top tournament player and well respected by all. This would not be the case if he hadn't combined his skill (the same level of which was likely held by many in that same 2004 event) with a considerable amount of luck to win that ME. If others in that crowd would have won instead, possibly they would now have the backing and ability to be on his stage.

The same goes for online play. Many top internet players built their rolls through improbable large cashes. Look at ZeeJustin and his 6 figure cash, who knows what he'll be able to accomplish with a roll like that. If he had not had the cash, maybe the things to follow wouldn't have happened.

A big MTT win can be a huge confidence booster, networking opportunity and buffer to not need money and focus on poker. These things lead to further success. Without the requisite luck to get that first big cash, many players likely are not getting their big break.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

No. It's really just time and work. I'm sure a lot of these guys are smart too, but anyone who plays and studies 15hrs a day is going to make it to the 20/40 at least. Now if you're not very smart maybe you may get stuck here, and if you're only mildly intelligent you may never be able to play higher than 30/60. It probably takes some genius, work/study ethic, and luckboxing to win higher than that.

Everyone on this forum is in love with the concept of extremely gifted people, but the one thing all of the top people here DO have in common is how much they play poker, study poker, and run hot. If you're smart youre going to move up faster and have a greater chance of being able to beat the harder games, but as long as you don't suffer from a learning disorder you can do very well as long as you put in the hours. Anyone who thinks they're going to be crushing 50/100NL playing/studying 12hrs a week needs to be kicked in the face. Almost no amount of genius and only insane luck is going to get them there.

Intelligence is only the deciding factor when both people work as hard.

[timmer]

... why winning yet mediocre B&M players make 5x more money
per hand, than online prodigies, While still tipping, paying a higher rake and no bonuses, rake back, ect...

And no one here crows about their successes?

[Dan Mezick]

I believe the qualities are: discernment, and technical ability.

Poker is a technical craft that also requires specific personal character traits such as courage and emotional control.

In engineering disciplines, it is common knowledge that the best are better by an order of magnitude when compared to the average. Poker is a highly technical craft much like engineering.

Poker also has this 'incomplete information" guesswork component. It turns out the very best law-enforcement detectives are better by an order of magnitude when compared to the average detective. These individuals are born with a level of discernment that allows them to read people very quickly. It is not a knack that is easily taught.

When you find an activity that you love to engage in, it is because you already have the knack. Add some real hard work and you can become a great one.

Poker is now 100% accessible to everyone worldwide via online play. In very large sample size of candidates, you are going to see some truly great ones emerge and rise quickly. That is what we are seeing. Introverts and others that may have avoided the game (or not had access to games) now can discover and even dominate this game.

One likely consequence of this is that truly astounding players are going to come out of nowwhere to dominate the game in as little as 1,2,3 years of serious high-volume play.

[revots33]

Innate natural ability + discipline + hard work. Keys to success in just about any field, come to think of it.

[boogiemang]

[ QUOTE ]
Innate natural ability + discipline + hard work. Keys to success in just about any field, come to think of it.

[/ QUOTE ] dr. al you said micheal jordan was a freak, and well he was but its not to say he didnt work on his shot countless number of hours. he didnt come out of the womb hitting threes and jumping over houses. the quote is pretty on point in my opionion

[djack]

This is a simple question. Lots of intelligence and lots of hard work, at both studying and playing.

If you want to be successful at anything, you usually need to be semi-obsessive at it.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

They play and/or study 15hrs a day. Thats all folks.

[ QUOTE ]
They play and/or study 15hrs a day. Thats all folks.

[/ QUOTE ]

And who says that poker isn't get rich quick!!! Baw, I say!

[timmer]

<Yet, I've been wondering lately, what accounts for certain players rapid and meteoric rise to success.>

meteoric rise to success often isnt as meteoric as it seems to be.

If it is, it is usually fueled by a huge tankfull of Luck.

especially in the huge tournament fields.