No, I have offered to answer the questions, but not all questions can be answered in a simple yes or no way, and the fact that he demands it has my senses alerted to potential sophistry.

Gauging a stranger's amount of self-awareness over a web forum is a little ridiculous, no?

Brit I find it incredible that you are intelligent enough to write the way you do, but still dumb enough to actually believe what you have addressed in your OP (unless you're just leveling us all).

Not at all. It's loud and clear. You come off as clueless, and project that even more with each additional post. You do make a good point as to why marijuana should be legalized though.

you can only pick your spots to a certain extent, (but it is dependant on many factors). Although the odds fluctuate more in poker, every single situation has workable odds. And all players are scared: why? Because poker players like to kid themselves that they are in total of control of what is happening at the table through the application of skill, but this is eroneous. You see poker includes, many many, I shall call them "blindspots", which means a player makes a decision more often than not on a "guess" and not on an "official skillset".



yea, and loooooong term results can be awful? watch the responses on this forum when a player who is considered an excellent player by other members' says he is quitting because he ran bad for 3 years. It's interesting watching them justify it. Players overstimate skill,and understimate luck in general.

You know as well as I do that the term "Pro" goes way beyond a level of indicating what they do for a living. It also denotes an advanced skillset.

I don't think Marijuana should be legalised. And I say that on the basis of the studies that keep being published showing how it is inextricably linked to mental illness and the personal and social issues that may arise from that.

I think part-time poker +day job is the most viable option in general but good luck.

are you ok?

I am not a troll, but you are looking like one about now.

It gets interesting when you realise that this should be a fairly obvious to a good player but it is evidently not. I ask, Why?

I am not a troll, they wanna make me one. And I have been deliberately offended much more by other members, but nobody says anything about that, do they? I have defended myself at times in a childish way, but who wouldn't given the amount of vitriol sent my way?

No, he's not okay! If only Erik Ryland had some medical marijuana, he might not refer to himself as a 3rd party. Your pledge of just $1 a day could help save idiots like young Erik. 3rd party idiots are starving for it all over the world. Don't let Erik go without the help he needs. A mind like young Eriks is a terrible thing to not waste.

lol

your self-delusion is absolutely amazing

Brit - I love your post. You make good points and I agree with the vast majority of them..and I've made 130k this year from playing poker. lol.

To use your pilot example, it just does not translate. A pilot is given the tools and extensive training to fly a plane, to avoid catastrophe, crashing, stalling etc. A Pilot has control of the plane, a poker player does not have control of the game (as much as he think he does). Imagine two soldiers, one relies on a map to avoid potential landmines in a field, and another who is going to rely on his inuition/aptitude to help him know where the mines are. They both are taking risks but who is taking more of a risk? It is clearly the the latter soldier. Poker players exaggerate how much control they have over the variables in poker, which includes the other player and the games themselves, but they will not face up to the immediate danger that they are actually BLIND to many areas of the game that to use the analogy could "blow them up" any second.

Yes it is. Now entertain us with your answers.

right, right.

[x] OP blames the game of poker for his lack of understanding the game of poker.

Pilots can't control mechanical or electronic malfunctions, or weather, or any number of things that might arise. The point is, No matter what you do, you have to gamble at some point, and because of training, or experience, or past knowledge, the gamble you are taking is an educated gamble and you are far less likely to fail than someone with lesser skills, knowledge, and experience. Luck plays a part in everything. But how much? An inexperienced poker player doesn't stand a snowballs chance in he## at a table with pros. Now he could get lucky once and make a big haul. But it won't happen too often. He/she would be so outgunned and over-matched by the skill of the pros that the odds are far too great against them to succeed.

Brit,

Why do you think that you have the ability to see through the lies, yet all the other people, some of which are undoubtedly smarter than you, can't?

Is there a possibility that you're wrong because you don't really understand how the game works? Or are you just special, in that you are smarter than the people who have actually thought about this game for years?

imo.

I am sorry, but you ARE a troll.

Not because of your later posts; only because of the OP. You want to cause a discussion and use controversial ideas and language - good.

But if you start off by pissing off all the true believers, the chances that anyone will really listen to you is nil. All you can hope for then is being flamed - and that is the definition of being a troll.

Be more diplomatic, you have a lot of sound views. You want people to hear them.

Pilots aren't asked to fly blindfolded. Poker players are. Poker players believe that "skill" can overcome this, however,I am saying that no amount of experience will save you from the abundant blindspots in poker. For example, two people consistently raise the same amount with a big pair. What skillset are you going to use to figure out how big when the flop comes 7 2 10 rainbow an they go all in? You are holding pocket jacks. What do you do, and based on what? If you are going to try and explain that you goto your memory banks of how they play to find an answer lets further consider this 1.) you have never played the person before or 2.) they are trying to trick you. Now you may say, ahh they want me to fold because they went all in,or you may say ahh they want me call because its a deliberate overbet. You could be wrong in both choices. Where is the "skill"?

Well this depends on what you classify as an inexperienced player. If you are saying that they only learnt the rules in the morning and they were due to play in the afternoon, then no probably not. But I also think that a "fairly experienced player" could sit at the table and have a good chance of winning.

There aren't as many levels of poker skill as people make out. People always like to use the "ultimate beginner" example to prove that skill is very important in poker but it is just common sense that someone new to something wont know what they are doing. Iam saying there is a big difference between the ultimate beginer and the experienced player but after that, there isn't much that sets anyone apart

I can't please all the people all the time. Perhaps if I didn't see People on these forums regularly and cynically flame people for next to nothing 9including myself) then I might change my approach. Yes, my style is direct but sometimes it has to be for people to take note.

I am diplomatic. but im not going to be PC just cus some emo wants me I.P banned for having an opinion.

op what are your thoughts on day trading for a living?

also, you should really try to focus on something more positive and productive besides denouncing poker on a ****ing internet poker forum, sick life.