Yeah I am both delusional and stupid, you win.

You seriously think hi stakes pros never realized they were playing against a range of possible hands? Or that having ak limited the liklihood of someone having aa or kk?

G bucks are merely Skalansky dollars however, it takes into consideration that your opponent has a range of hands and not one specific hand. Intuitively any hi stakes winner I know was always aware of the fact that they did not know their opponents hole cards. Therefore they knew they were up against a range of potential hands.

Maybe you missed my previous post acknowledging that newer generation players did help to create a lexicon that more efficiently explains poker concepts. Just because they have more efficiently explained something doesn't mean they created the concept.

Younger people have limited experiences upon which to reflect and often exagerate the originality or importance of something to which they have never been exposed. This leads to over stating the "epicness" of ordinary events or not appreciating the historical context of what they are witnessing. Perspective and humility come with age, just be patient.

Also something that "new school" players don't fully understand is game selection. Many old school players avoided hi stakes on line games the past few years because there were much softer spots elsewhere. Generally once you have alot of money, you value your time more, and will only work and apply deep thougt to situations where the expected outcome is highly profitable. I have seen the very best on line players play each for days on end without any significant edge. Pissing contest that at best yields marginal profitability, not to mention how variance can obliterate this small edge in the short term.

You win, I am stupid and delusional.

g bucks =/= sklansky dollars lol

[x] losing player

[x] Just helped pay for Mom's kitchen renovation with poker winnings.

Did you get granite countertops? Did you go with an island in the middle or is she going to solely use counter space underneath the cabinets?

"In Stasi we had a saying: 'Ask many questions and eventually the lying man will change his story'"

sooo. for the record, you are saying you dont care about your results playing poker? if you win or lose money - the result of your play and abilities - it dowan't matter to you?

How odd. I look for positive results when I play poker...

Someone this intelligent is banned from 2+2, yet morons like Alvin are allowed to create threads? Unjust, IMO, and the site suffers because of it.

str8winner got banned due to this being an online minded site, not live

I'll be next for that last post 100%

What he meant was that every decision has a particular EV associated with it. You should try to make the best decisions. However, sometimes you can make the correct decision and a bad result can occur. Conversely you can make a bad decision and a good result can occur.

Just because a bad or good result occurs in a poker hand doesn't mean that you played the hand poorly or well and you shouldn't use short term results like that to judge how well you played. When people do this, they are often told that they are being results oriented and that they shouldn't be.

For example you may be facing an all-in on the turn with a naked FD. Say you are getting 2.2 to 1. This is a clear fold. However, say you call and the river completes your flush and you win. This was a good result, but thinking you played well is completely results oriented. Your decision to call was awful.

Conversely you could call an all-in on the turn with middle set. Then the river completes villain's FD and you lose. This is a bad result. However, this does not mean that your turn call was bad (obviously I left out a ton of details here .... it is possible to make up a hand where the turn call would be bad ..... but in most cases calling will be correct).

^^^

This,

Thinking that Doyle lifestyle in the old days was a prime example of +EV decisions just because he became a live legend and survived when people actually tried to end his life is really results oriented.
Pherhaps he had no choice but he really was taking a way higher risk than the people who had money on ftp

and the OP not responding to this argument and only coming back to the thread to say he makes money of poker and that the new school only created a new lingo really really tilts me as much as it cracks me up

You are missing the point.

every NL 400 reg has more money than most live pros.

No granite counter tops. Just a re-tiling. No islands because there is no space for it. New flooring. New basin. Repainting of all cabinets. No changing of fridge and stove, but new microwave and rice cooker.

Still trying to learn how to make 75 bucks per hour playing 1-2 live. I'll switch to 2-5 if it doesn't work out since I already have the troll for it, anyway. Too bad they don't spread heads up SNG in live games. That would be the nuts.

Oh by the way, in defense of the "old school", it requires 1,500 hands of experience online to equal 1 hand of experience offline.

Also, what stakes did you play online?

*picks up 73o under the gun*

Online: click fold button
Live: remove card protector, push cards forward, and declare a fold

Yea that does seem like it requires 1500x more energy

Well when you have the working memory capacity of a slug, you need the action to be really slow and at least a few minutes between each hand so that you can try to make sense of what just happened.

I'll save you the time: It's not possible to make $75 per hour playing 1/2 live. Not possible to make $75 per hour at most 2/5 live games either ....... maybe it could be possible to get close if the buy-in isn't capped and people often play very deep and very badly.

I'm not sure how you figure the 1500 = 1 thing. They seem to be arbitrary numbers with nothing backing them up and no explanation. It also doesn't seem right to me.

I bolded a word. I thought the typo was funny. Someone was going to mention it .... I wonder if I'm first.



EDIT:

I am first.

Lol nice catch, oh the irony...

I feast on the bones of trolls....

OP, you don't even have the troll for NVG let alone 2/5

um... is there a basis for this?? or is this just more of your spewing opinions with no facts... and pretty ignorant spews at that - i mean you might have got a LITTLE bit of credit if you had made it 2-1 hands making up the experience -- but 1500 - 1?? laughable. I've been playing live poker for 15 years and online for 6 or so (not anymore because im usa) - so speaking from both sides - i can say i definately fear a thinking online player who might step up to my live table MUCH more than the "old school regs" who have been sitting there with me for years -- giving their retirement money to me.

Lmaooo alvin how many times were u dropped as a baby? Please keep responding with ur awesome claims, maybe ill learn something about kitchen decoration and hourly rates at 1-2. 1500:1 thing is amazing tho, u sure have some unique methods for calculating things. Oh wait nvm live players dont need to use math right?

Online guys def have wittier comebacks.