You just created a new word.

Anyways I agree with everything that Alvin has said, Tilt was -EV to keep loads of money on, hard to deny.

[x] OP recently had his aces cracked and got stacked by an 18 yo kid in a hoodie in his regular B&M

OP is right. Putting all your money in one poker site while it's illegal is not wise. But being right doesn't change the fact that OP is one huge ***hole, old school or not.

I have had some time to reflect on what I wrote on the OP and I'm shocked about how right I was. Poker is all about decisions. Table selection, whether to 3-bet or not, to c-bet or not to c-bet that is the question, play tight or loose. How to spread out the bankroll (bank, safety deposit box, mattress, gold, in a shady poker website that is circumventing the law, etc.) is a decision too and, to repeat, it is very ironic how people who pride themselves in their play of the hand EV maximizings made the really bad decisions in the how to spread the bankroll department which is existential.

Not leveling. Just pointing out a truth. Everyone makes mistakes. Lessons can be learned for future decisions.

I admit that I also made a mistake putting my entire roll on stars but I knew they would pay because of their setting aside players deposit policy.

Alvin, how do you respond to stories of pros sleeping in their cars with millions? seems at least as -ev plus if anyone knew youd be putting yourself in bodily harm

who knows what stories we havent heard

sounds like these old live pros should learn to use banks

you KNEW this?? i mean i am just very lucky and grateful that my money was on stars - but it was just a lucky decision i made a few years back (to play mostly on stars or ftp)...

you are just too smart i guess!! you know everything!

(i honestly can't believe how you all let this guy get you all worked up - just go to the bandm and take his money - seems like an easy thing to do)

Not sure what the bolded has to do with this ....?

Existentialism


Perhaps you meant essential ...?

This guy said it best. Op cant truly believe everything hes saying. He just likes arguing for the sake of arguing (and arguing poorly at that).

Op you cant start a thread like this and then not back it up. Ive read you getting owned like 10 times and your rebuttals are terrible and mostly irrelevant. Yea hes prob really bad at poker but most of all his life is boring and hes attention starved.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/wittier

Enough eggs in this thread for at least 5 omelets.

[] OP understands the meaning of Irony
[x] OP likes to create meaningless threads
[x] OP is pissed at kids who owns him at the casino on a daily basis.

If this statement is true now, it was true 30 years ago. Still Doyle's SuperSystem and Slansky's books were able to revolutionize the game and make it way harder.

Internet poker revolutionized the game again and made it even more aggressive. It's obvious if you look at tournament poker. The live scene is completely dominated by 21yr olds (just look at the average age at final tables).

I don't buy in the whole "live-players-are-better-no-online-players-will-crush-you-no-u" debate as it is completely silly to begin with. And I do agree that probably the top echolon of live players (instinctively?) knew all the advanced concepts already.

But I think the debate is silly for another two reasons. 1) Most online play is 100bb play, most live play is much much deeper. Apples and oranges. 2) Live high stakes is a lot of mixed games. Apples and oranges again.


And you're going to name one?

As an intelligent person you should know that stating something that we can't verify is worthless.

Btw I know a lot of Hollywood celebrities.


You're right. None of "us" reinvented the wheel. But while you're still driving in your Model-T we invented us some nice Porsche and Ducati.

Palikari quoted str8winner ...

"Originally Posted by str8winner
I know many 7+ figure winners who are very thankful for the upsurge in poker popularity brought about by the "new school."

And you're going to name one?"


Stop by Bobby's room at the Bellagio or Ivey's room at the Aria and meet several of them.

So you quoted the least interesting part of my post so that you could say anything. lol#1

But still you don't give 1 single name. lol#2

Plus ... the most important part (bolded so you don't miss it this time). The upsurge in poker popularity wasn't brought in by "the new school". That in itself is a stupid statement. Poker popularity rose because of hole card cams, the moneymaker effect etc. but certainly not because some kids on the internet started talking about "range merging" and "non exploitable shove ranges".

And I'm pretty sure that all the great live pros are not happy when a good "new school" player joins their table. They want the businessman that saw Moneymaker on TV. Certainly not a "new school" player.

But you obviously either don't read my posts carefully or you suck at reading comprehension if you missed what I said about live players in general:

Wasting my time -> unsubscribe

Has anyone pointed out to OP that Old School players, such as Doyle regularly put their entire 'rolls on the table. Even tnough they were aware the game might get robbed.

Oh, the irony.

What's up with the personal attacks? Just pointing out truth.

FFS, why is this thread 12 pages? And lol at OP replying to every comment.

OP, I guess most of the opster here haven't seen the latest news about their beloved internet poker in this forum.

Just do what most of us have been doing... taking their money at the live casinos. The internet crew is so weak at live cash it is great.

best post so far.

I think the topic in OP is legit, although there is a solid chance he is trolling.