Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Is it worth reading RGP alongside 2+2? Is there interesting there you don't find here? Do the posters overlap or are there a lot of people there who don't come here? Are its glory days long gone? Does Russ Georgiev still post; are there high stakes players who post there but not here, or any other attractions to reading that newsgroup?

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec...k=sg&hl=en

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

yesnonoyesnoyesnononoyesyesno.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

I hear its better, maybe you can find a new home?

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Serious answer, anyone?

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Serious answer, anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

i am ron jeremy's lack of disdain

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

I could really go for some maple syrup right about now.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

CIRCLE GETS THE SQUARE...

...AMENTS! LOL!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

BIG BUCKS NO WHAMMY!

[ QUOTE ]
Serious answer, anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]QFT, SHIIP LDO!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
BIG BUCKS NO WHAMMY!



[/ QUOTE ]

STOP!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

it used to be the best

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

set up your own rec.gambling.highstakerailbirds

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Serious answer, anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Usenet started it's downfall circa September, 1993, when AOL users where unleashed upon Usenet. Since then, it's been slowly dying, and the once glorious Usenet is now reduced to spammers, trolls, conspiracy nuts and utter morons.

There are still a few oasises out there that captures some of the former greatness of Usenet, but rec.gambling is not one of them.

R.I.P. Usenet [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Thanks - yes, I saw lots of spam, trolling and bickering!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks - yes, I saw lots of spam, trolling and bickering!

[/ QUOTE ]AND ALMOST NO RAILTARDING!!!!! wtf!?!??!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

I primarily read RGP until about a year ago, but I don't read it anymore. I guess I don't think RGP is still worth reading.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Who are the people that post to RGP - surely not 18-25 year olds?

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

I feel psychologically more comfortable knowing that if anything interesting comes up there, LuckyJimm will let us know. He's our bird dog. Sniffing out the doves and quail and alligators and snakes and the end of many a rainbow.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

It might skew a little older than 2+2, but there are still plenty of younger players there. Remember, most poker players came in during the boom and most of the new players are young. When the boom started, RGP still had a shred of credibility.

I can confirm that in its glory days (before I started posting there), there were a bunch of people posting who wound up as TV pros including Negreanu, Lederer and Hellmuth and other very good players. I've also recognized about 8 or 9 screen names on 2+2 from people who started on RGP. RGP was the 2+2 of its time, but smaller and higher quality.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks - yes, I saw lots of spam, trolling and bickering!

[/ QUOTE ]

On Rec.Gambling or 2+2? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]







/I keed. I keed.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

RGP = Spam city

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Hellmuth posted on internet forums? Oh man.......

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

RGP became kind of pointless about 4 years ago. I suspect that a lot of the people posting then thought it was crappy compared to four years before that too...

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

So its glory days were probably the mid-1980s, when it was just Chris Ferguson talking to himself...

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
So its glory days were probably the mid-1980s, when it was DN making annie duke bashing threads...

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Late 90s I think, perhaps 2000. They had Negreanu posting, Lederer, Hellmuth, Abdul, and random other worthwhile people. Also, Terrence Chan has a good story of how he was "head hunted" by the owners of PokerStars to consult on the setting up of the site, thanks to his RGP presence.

What price someone looking back in 10 years and say "Yeh, the mid two thousands were the best time on 2 + 2, they had aba posting, clayaiken, barry greenstein" etc...

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

And LuckyJimm!

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And SALAZAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Reading my old RGP posts is always a good laugh.

Abdul was the man though, and I thank him very much for all of my monies.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

I cannot read it, literally.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Usenet started it's downfall circa September, 1993, when AOL users where unleashed upon Usenet. Since then, it's been slowly dying, and the once glorious Usenet is now reduced to spammers, trolls, conspiracy nuts and utter morons.

There are still a few oasises out there that captures some of the former greatness of Usenet, but rec.gambling is not one of them.

R.I.P. Usenet [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really sad what happened to Usenet. RGP was really instrumental in the development of modern poker. I used to spend a lot of time in comp.compression and comp.lang.c and sci.physics ; they used to be filled with the top professors in the field, but now aside from spam and trolls the main denizens are perpetual-motion-machine-nutjobs and kids making "do my homework for me" posts. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Usenet started it's downfall circa September, 1993, when AOL users where unleashed upon Usenet. Since then, it's been slowly dying, and the once glorious Usenet is now reduced to spammers, trolls, conspiracy nuts and utter morons.

There are still a few oasises out there that captures some of the former greatness of Usenet, but rec.gambling is not one of them.

R.I.P. Usenet [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really sad what happened to Usenet. RGP was really instrumental in the development of modern poker. I used to spend a lot of time in comp.compression and comp.lang.c and sci.physics ; they used to be filled with the top professors in the field, but now aside from spam and trolls the main denizens are perpetual-motion-machine-nutjobs and kids making "do my homework for me" posts. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Once upon a time, it was the place for great porn. sigh

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Once upon a time, it was the place for great porn. sigh

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying alt.bestiality.hamster.duct.tape fails to deliver like it used to? Nooooooooooooooo.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
RGP = Spam city

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

There is a lot of Spam on RGP, but there are still people who contribute by posting strat or asking for trip advice. It isn't dead, it just isn't very good.

For those who want to check it out, go to recpoker.com or recgroups.com for an html interface. I might read 2+2 now, but my best days in poker were while I was reading RGP and I'll remember it fondly.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And LuckyJimm!

[/ QUOTE ]

Go Jimm! [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
There is a lot of Spam on RGP, but there are still people who contribute by posting strat or asking for trip advice. It isn't dead, it just isn't very good.

For those who want to check it out, go to recpoker.com or recgroups.com for an html interface. I might read 2+2 now, but my best days in poker were while I was reading RGP and I'll remember it fondly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I concur completely. I started lurking there in 1998 with my webtv. lol

There used to be great strategy posts by Mike Caro, byoon, AbdulJalib, even Tad Perry and many others. There may be some of same now but I can't seem to get through all the spam to find it.

Funny. In the wild west days of old, I actually preferred the unrestricted, unmoderated "freedom" of rgp to the moderated "hobnail boot of the state" censored aspects of 2p2. Now it seems all the good stuff is buried by said freedom.

If/when I get banned here, will I get to retain my luker's license. I guess that I could do without lurking, but I wouldn't really like it.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is it worth reading RGP alongside 2+2?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It's a sewer.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Speaking of old school, anyone know what ever happened to Vince Lepore? I went on 2p2 hiatus a while back, and I just realized he never posts anymore.

Re: Is Rec.Gambling.Poker still worth reading?
 

Weren't carson and all them going to start a moderated newsgroup? I kind of like the simple usenet format but those days are over forum software even as clunky as 2p2 is much better.

Russ G. posts are still fun to read.