Quote:
Originally Posted by MyTurn2Raise
this attitude is really BS
how on Earth are authors not to be held accountable for what they've actually done?
Yeah, great teachers are not always the greatest players, but they are not losing players.
The market is saturated with crummy books right now and a posse of players that don't win or are also tied to 'coaching sites' saying what a good deal the book is. Do you see the problem in that sort of verification process????
2p2 is the place where you can usually hold sites, pros, etc accountable, but you cannot if it's a book written by someone who will not prove they have a long-term winning record in the game they are writing about. I wonder why that is. It's completely inconsistent and a shyster move on the players that come here to learn but don't realize many books are being pushed on them by people that don't have success in the games they are writing about.
This is incorrect.
It really shouldn't matter very much if the teacher is a winner. Maybe he has a sound mind, but has major tilt issues and thus can't win.
There are many winners who are poor teachers and can't explain their thoughts or don't even know why they do things sometimes. And there may be a very good sound thinking player who either tilts, or hero calls just to confirm his reads, or does any number of things that cost money.
I haven't looked up Belugawhale. I don't care if he's a winner. I've read what he's written, I've seen his videos, and I am able to judge for myself the merit of his words. What he says and how he thinks makes sense logically. He approaches the game correctly, and his deductions about proper play come from that solid framework.
Now somebody who knows little about gambling, and/or is not good with logic or math, or somebody who simply hasn't played long enough -- this type of person may not be able to judge merit on his own may need some other indicator of merit, like winning/losing. But that's a fall-back inaccurate method to be used if you are just too inexperienced to know better.
Of course, a winning player who IS ALSO a good coach may be able to help with non-theory things that relate to winning and in that respect he may be of immense help. But to say that straight poker theory shouldn't be completely valid unless the player is a winner is faulty.