Do those guys really have a big enough sample size for us to tell if they are winners or not? Seems like a couple of them could just be running very very hot and decently skilled.
some things are much more important than others. the biggest winners at the game key in on those things. others may play better but dont win or win more. so then who is the better player.
4 basic things make you a great player: strong mental game, strong knowledge of poker theory, experience and intelligence.
You can work to attain the first three things and many people do. You can't control intelligence, but I think what separates the very great players is very high intelligence, in combination with these other things. When you are in a poker hand, and you have the other 3 things going for you, what is going to separate you and make you play better is how deeply you are able to think about that specific spot on the fly.
Given enough time, a player who has the other three things can analyze all the relevant information and probably come up with the optimal play. But someone very intelligent can do it a lot faster and probably reach a deeper level of analysis within the time he has to act with a specific hand.
I think you can become a fairly great player with simply above-average intelligence if you master the other three things (although it will take you longer), but to become one of the truly elite top players, I think you probably need close to a genius level IQ.
Many top poker and chess players can play 20 or even 100 tables at the same time against up to respectable competition. But many of them cant. And they have no better memory of random positions, just of normal positions, making it learning.
Though their visual abilities can often play eayes closed also as they remember all positions, and similar thing can happen at poker with tens of tables. But still, many of then cant play that many tables as their memory cant handle it.
One needs to take the talents from somewhere else but speed. A sense of the situation looks like a better guess and the books and the experience obviously isnt enough. And there is a speed test called IQ, that is a test to find ******s, not intelligence.
Not everyone thinks top fast. It has more to do with understanding.
Study and experience does not cover it all, no matter how much u play and study. Speed should help, but maybe some cover it with depth, intuition. Like younger is faster, older is wiser.
Some just underdtand the game faster, better, and that is why they are better, not just because they know what even i already know. This is why i will stop serious poker after about 2 or 3 years more, after having come to my potential, having studied and played most every game, form and format. Not going to try any further then as i then will know thats the best i can manage, and i know it will not be then only in my lack of knowledge and experience but in my performance that is not and wont get significantly better. Will then play, as things are now online, just mixed and tournaments thats all i play even now, because of more fun, and with some luck, maybe i will find some area from there that fits the best for me, or i just get lucky.
I see your point and believe it has some merit, but ultimately I disagree.
The thing about hitting a ceiling is that if you want it bad enough you won't hit any ceiling. You will keep going and keep improving. Their is more to it than just work on it's own. It's work with clarity and work with little or no frustration. When mid tier people start to plateau they get frustrated and even though they might continue to work just as hard, they don't have the same belief in their work or the same clarity going forward. Their work is as a result not as efficient and their growth affected. Then they fall behind or stay stuck. The lose sight of the goal, often without fully realizing this has happened.
Doesn't this mean that they are less intelligent that the elite players and thus the other guys point is actually correct?
Ok, I think there seems to be a general consensus on the 4 things mentioned in Crazylind's great post: strong mental game, strong knowledge of poker theory, experience and intelligence.
What steps can we take to develop those traits (beside intelligence)?
1: Mental Game. Aside from reading The Mental Game of Poker, how can we develop this aspect of our game?
2: Poker Theory. I guess discussing hands a lot, watching training videos, analyzing your database for leaks. Game Theory.
3: Experience. Play lots? Is that it?
4: Intelligence. Is there a way to offset any disadvantage people might have if they're not MENSA members? Such as studying math and training the brain to perform a little quicker?