this thread is annoying. if doyle brunson learned poker in today's world, he would have all the resources we do and the passion he had, heart and intelligence and ability to read people would make him a big winner again. Stu Ungar was a freakin once in a lifetime genius with games. there may never be another stu ungar.

I have been around gambling in one for or another since i graduated high school, either with pool, horses, cards, casino's sports, bowling, ect...you name it. I have seen the games, the manipulation. the bottom line is that those with "gamble" have an ability to know when they are gambling with the best of it, and that never changes - old school or new school.

a funny thing happens as you get older, you have made your money, your reputation and done what you wanted to do in life. you start to crystalize in your thinking and you are just passing time. If however, this old generation were young and learning for the first time today, they would do just as well as the young generation

in short, willie mays could still play centerfield and Ali would still kick a lot of ass

Well I have to say that I dont think anyone has done more to educate new poker players then Sklansky and Malmuth..their books are fantastic and they encourage rational thinking.

Yeah, I agree. I think they don't educate them so they can beat them easily

This might be a bit off topic, but how does playing 20+ tables online with HEM or PTR or whatever make the game anything but a grind to make some money. Are these guys who are clicking on a mouse without thinking much really passionate about poker, or are they passionate about using any and all tools to gain an edge and make money? For many, there would be an overlap of these goals, but they can also be mutually exclusive(or have very little overlap).

And people play poker for many different reasons, not just to make money. If I was grinding online for 10+ hours a day on 20+ tables, the joy of playing poker would be sucked right out me.

Seriously, anyone who says that poker players are better than ever, that everyone's solid needs to wake the hell up. Poker players are absolutely, without a doubt WORSE than ever.

They're more aggressive than ever yes, but for the most part, it's a misapplication of poker theory put together by far, far better players than them. No one has any idea what to open from where, people know they should be shipping light and squeezing but they have no idea what good spots to do so are, or what hands are good to do it with. Forget about calling ranges and pot odds. The number of people I see shipping AIPF in an unopened pot for >30 bbs when half the table covers them is ludicrous. And don't get me started on the complete dearth of creativity in postflop play.

The only solace I can take when someone somehow finds their way all in on the flop in a 180bb pot with 99 on a T x x board and miraculously catches is that, at the very least they have pretty horrendous sharkscope graphs.

I have respect for the top 1% of internet poker players who really, really know what they're doing. The other 99% deserve every ounce of derision coming their way, no matter who is giving it to them.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. Pot, meet kettle.

apples and oranges.. i've played enough live against old timers to know that they show little respect for some unknown that may be playing more than them online.. personally i could care less because when you're finished for the session they respect you for your play.

This^ X2

and Internet players and Live players are different in a sense that the live players do not even play half as many hands in an hour. SO variance and tilt sting WAY more online then live. However I learned how to play live, but it was post poker boom. I am 18 and have been playing poker for 4 and 1/2 years almost straight. I'd like to think I'm great but I still have ALOT to learn about the game.

Is there really such thing as new and old breed??

Its probobly becuase most of the older players (over 40) are just nitty ABC poker players and just arent on the level of todays great young players, like dwan, galfond, haxton, mercier... etc.

OLD PEOPLE SUCK!!!

what i mean by that is stuck in their ways people. i think i may have been a little unjust myself to old school, but i think it is more as a defense as we didnt get a lot of respect 2 years ago or even so much today with people like greenstein saying every 3 minutes "i think that these kids think they invented gambling".

in a way you are god damn right barry, we reinvented the s**t out that s**t. all the things that internet players have done to progress the mathematics of the game the last 5 years is insane compared to the progression over the 100 years prior. i would send any full stacking break even prerakeback player back to the 70s and watch them destroy every NLHE game there and win 8-10 WSOP MEs. as much as i hate hellmuth** he was way before his time and that is why he won so many bracelets, he became old school though and what has he done lately (other than sell his soul and name to become dirty filthy fkn rich as hell for a poker player)?

all of that being said, it is not like the old school players wouldnt have done what we have done if they had our resources, they would have. in a lot of ways they laid a lot of ground work with theories. they were theories because they werent proven until computers could do all of the math for us.

so credit is due to the old school but dont discredit what we have accomplished. how sick is it that i have played more hands than doyle brunson? you cant say that those hands dont give some form of experience, and there are people who have played far more than i have.

and try not to judge us new school kids, we are young. with being young comes being cocky, arrogant, and discrediting people who know what they are talking about. but to you old schoolers being old means you will fear change and discredit those after you in an attempt to try and hold on to what little fame and significance you have left in the life you love. i know it cant be easy for you old schoolers watching kids under the age of 21 staking bracelet winners.

*you can substitute old school with old timer wherever you feel fit. new school can be substituted with cocky arrogant whipper snapper wherever you feel fit.

**i didnt mention unger here because i have great respect for what he did with 52 cards, not so much with hellmuth, so it proved my point better.

You are 100% right. But at the end of the day, Doyle is a zillionaire and you are a thousandaire.

and he did it with out RB or HEM

Over time I came to found (when playing against old players) that they give a lot more credit to the poker etiquette than poker strategy. They play like if they were playing some sort of chinese poker. That's to play with luck and people. They dont mind AT ALL what theyre holding, they just try to read if you're scared or holding.

+1.

Barry Greenstein's "These kids think they invented gambling" blah blah blah.

Those young internet kids did reinvent the wheel, todays game is so far ahead of the past.

You're never too old a dog to learn new tricks. Daniel is proving that. And I'm not sure that Doyle has seen his last bracelet. He won a WSOP bracelet just two years ago.

I was 50 years old when I played my first tournament on PokerStars, and I played my first live tournament a year after that. I set aside time for study every week, and I plan to keep improving.

Here's what I think about age as a limitation:

About 10 years ago my sons and I ran a 5K race at the college where I was working on a degree. There was an old guy who had entered the race, and everyone was making a point of calling him doctor. I finally asked what was going on.

He was 70 years old, running a 5K--and he had recently earned a Ph.D.

Firstly...I feel there is a little respect from us "younger" generation in general and us that do have respect for others are looked down on sometime. As for the reasons to play the game. That is SO different from player to player.

For instance I play cause I enjoy the math of poker the social aspect and the income it gives me why I am transitioning over to pro with a trip around the US starting with a swing down to Vegas. Anyway...I say the new breeds should have respect for the old breeds and others in general there is a lot to learn from everyone in general. LIFE in general is a never ending learning experiance.

I am 55 years old, and when I was a computer science major, there were no home computers. My college was thinking about getting it's first modem. Everything is changing so fast, compared to how fast things changed 20 years ago, that today's internet phenoms will probably be the old breed in 5 years.

5 years from now there will be better coaching, better HUDs, and better learning technology in general. In 10 years, computers as we know them might not even exist. I have heard a prediction (on Nova, a PBS science program) that by the year 2100 our computer information will be displayed on a contact lens.

Along with the software and hardware (if those words will even mean anything), learning itself will be easier, with new drugs and other methods available to increase learning and memory.

Of course, it could work the other way, as people live longer. On Nova, the prediction was that the average lifespan will be 150 by the year 2100. There is a laboratory that is growing replacement human organs (so far, bladders and windpipes) from human cells.

Doyle Brunson is still a winning player, he has been playing for over 50 years, and he could conceivably still win bracelets in stud or mixed games. So who knows, one of Jennifer Harman's twins might be the top player in the world for 100 years.

yeah and i think that...

Um.. How about a bracelet not even 4 years ago.. You have one that we don't know about bro lol???

Alas the old argument of "Kids these days" Every institution or society has one group of Veterans commenting on the up and coming newer generation. I will give the same statment my Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps said when I was in the Marines. "Young Marines are Good to Go." Most youngsters in the newer generation are good natured and have respect for the veterans. The reason why it seems the opposite is because the disrepectful bunch gets the most attention.

Its is the same as the 10-1 rule. For every one compliment, a person will hear 10 complaints. On the same token, the veterans can learn a lot from the youngsters and vice versa if egos are willing to be set asise.

Crazy internet kids... always raising.

that is your argument to discredit my credibility? or that is your argument to say he is in the same percentile of poker players that he was at in 1989-1993?

Nice!

I'm 32, and feel caught between the two generations. I've learned how to play online in 2004, but my competitive style in all things is to do so quietly, w/ respect for my opponents. That being said, I feel caught between the two generations.

Enough with my perspective, the reason why I'm posting is I recently played 2/5 at Commerce, and I felt this reflected the tension between the generations. There was a healthy mix of seasoned players and young online grinders.

• Talked it up w/ two "oldies," while the best player at the table was a silent dude w/ glasses and headphones. After he left, the veterans were the ones who said he was the best at the table. But while he was there, they ripped on "typical Internet players with headphones and glasses." That's kinda dick.
• Almost all the players at that table had online accounts at some point. Some of the vets were asking me about how to get money onto sites like Bodog.
• Biggest donkey at the table was a fatter, friendlier version of Chris Moneymaker. He wouldn't stop talking either. Ever. I mean, he was just a talking machine. The more seasoned players would get him talking, and then "aim" him at the other players, lol. Great use of a big talker.
• Most frequent bluffer at the table was the oldest guy (mid-70s?) at the table, playing what may have been his version of small ball. Talk about evolving, good for him!
• Biggest jerk at the table was a dude in his 40s. Making rude comments, eating at table, burping, etc.
• After the best player at the table left, biggest winner was the donkey. He sucked out about 5 times on all-in hands. I'm sure he gave some of it back after I left.

So, we all got along for the most part and it was a fun game w/ many swings. Bad beats were taken classily by all generations.

But I don't mind some salty behavior. I had a golf pro recently "Shhhh" me after I dropped an F-bomb after a tee shot (It was just right of the fairway, but I was unhappy). I thought, "****, cursing is half the fun of this game!"

Also, salty behavior isn't so bad because it encourages stereotypes. Lesser players like myself have learned to take advantage of those stereotypes, it helps even the scales.

However, these assbags who insist on berating people, are totally outta line. One has to wonder if Phil Hellmuth is quite literally teaching the younger generations that this is okay for some reason.