Quote:
Originally Posted by michelle227
Sort of ironic that you drop Rounders when stud actually made multiple appearances in the movie...
What didn't exactly help stud is the illusion that the judge's game gives that it was only for the raisins. But the kids today (which I put as anyone under 35) never bothered to learn the skill games and so it becomes easier for them to claim they 'suck' or 'are boring' instead of expanding their horizon.
Watched that movie again recently. So great. And it was before Matt Damon was so big as to become a bit annoying. And yes, NLH was definitely one of the featured stars of the film. That movie alone was probably responsible for me spending a hundred hours or so of my life at the Taj. That place was a borderline dump and the chips were so old, you could see through some of them. But what self-respecting poker player didn't have dreams of rolled up aces over kings or stacking checks off of dumb tourists?
Anyhow, I think you're taking a little too esoteric approach to this mixed game question. Something being popular and being good for you, or good for the intellect/soul are not the same thing. In fact, a case can be made that they are nearly universally mutually exclusive.
I am not a kid (by your definition). But I never took a liking to mixed games in the dozen or so years I have been playing poker (recreationally). It just isn't for me. That doesn't mean I look askew at those who do enjoy different variants. And I would even admit learning and/or becoming proficient in other games could possibly make me a better NLH player. I just don't think casinos have some sort of moral imperative to push the game in a direction where the money doesn't exist at this time in history. Who knows? Maybe at some point in the future when the NLH fad has truly waned, some other variant of poker will step forth and these message boards will be filled with NLH whiners. My vote is for "Indian" poker (no offense intended to any indigenous population, so relax).