[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look at his silly reply to the "NL cash games dying out" post. Mason predicted NL cash games would be dead. His response was not an admission that he was wrong, but he actually said "Well they actualy did." It's childish and silly. Even if they did become less popular for a time, it's clearly not for the reasons he gave - they were ludicrous and wildly wrong, and he can't admit it. Do you really need someone to explain to you why there are still bad players playing NL cash games? Do you really need someone like Mason trying to theorize to you why it can't possibly be happening?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an amazing paragraph. With only one exception that I know of, you could not find a no limit cash game that went on any sort of regular basis in a public cardroom for at least ten years. They only made a come back when no limit tournaments got on TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the point. The point is that the reason you gave for NL drying up IS WRONG. You said it's too easy for the good players to wipe out the bad players, so therefore the bad players would not play any more and only good players would be playing each other and hardly anyone would make any money. That's WRONG. You can spin this however you want. What's so hard about admitting that? It's no big deal to be wrong sometimes, but you act like a school child. That's one of the reasons your credibility is dropping.

There are 2 resasons NL cash are still popular even though so many bad people are playing. (This is my opinion and if I'm wrong in 5 years I'll admit it.)
1) there are so many bad players that bad players often just shift their money around at the limits they play (this is something you failed to recognize in your original essay.)
2) people have exposable income to spend. They have a gambling budget and they intend to spend it and have fun. This is why bad blackjack players, and roulette players, and keno players still flock to the casinos. (You failed to recognize this in your original essay.)