Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The chess world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation as well. Professional chess players are every bit the degenerates that professional poker players are so, in that sense, this aspect of the contrast between chess and poker is invalid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was just about to say the exact same thing. It is extremely naive to say the chess world is significantly more 'pure' than poker. Many, and perhaps the majority of, world class chess players are just complete degenerates. Chess is another game that can just really take over your life. Players ending their lives alone, mentally deranged, impovershed, and with substance abuse problems is far from uncommon. Not a good comparison at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Walter Browne managed two final tables in this year's WSOP.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Another issue I have with this article is correlation vs causation. You see lots of youthful players dominating the online poker scene, so you imply youthful players must have some natural learning advantage over older players. While you mention that brain function tends to decline with age, you offer no further elaboration.

Have you considered the issues of time, motivation, etc? Online poker is a game that requires thousands of hours of work and effort to reach the top in, not to mention the motivation to begin playing online in the first place. Who is more likely to be able to put in the thousands of hours it takes to master this game - teenagers or 25+ adults? Who is more likely to have the motivation and trust to deposit onto some online poker site in the first place?

There is a direct analog for this in chess as well. Is Victor Kortchnoj a freak somehow able to bypass 'brain decay', or does he simply maintain the motivation that many players lose as they age?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
So your saying Brian Townsend has peaked?


[/ QUOTE ]

Whats hes saying is that a player who dedicates them self to playing optimally from as early as possible will peak at 24, Brian has put nowhere near that kind of effort into his play and is still developing.

Also, I think that top chess players are better at chess than basically anyone is at anything, and I don't think poker will be that way any time soon.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

brandon adams and kenny tran are both DOWN money playing online...if you cant win online you shouldnt be putting yourself in a category above online. While there may be an added element to play live (an element barry greenstein says is widely overrated), online is very straight up and real poker and neither player is successful there. this makes their credibility in discussing the top players quite iffy.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
brandon adams and kenny tran are both DOWN money playing online...if you cant win online you shouldnt be putting yourself in a category above online. While there may be an added element to play live (an element barry greenstein says is widely overrated), online is very straight up and real poker and neither player is successful there. this makes their credibility in discussing the top players quite iffy.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to have cancer to research/analyze/understand it...even if what you're saying is really true...which I'm not really corroborating.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Very nice article Brandon. I agree in two or three years we will see an evolution in poker as these young guys who have known nothing else but playing poker 24/7 aided by tools such as 2+2, poker tracker, poker training sites, etc. mature. It's going to be scary.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
brandon adams and kenny tran are both DOWN money playing online...if you cant win online you shouldnt be putting yourself in a category above online. While there may be an added element to play live (an element barry greenstein says is widely overrated), online is very straight up and real poker and neither player is successful there. this makes their credibility in discussing the top players quite iffy.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to have cancer to research/analyze/understand it...even if what you're saying is really true...which I'm not really corroborating.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well actually, in some ways, you do...since chess has been brought up...if no one kept track of results of chess players, who would you trust in telling you who the best players are? Kasparov who beat everyone he played? Or me, a decent player who studied the game? Am I in the position to determine who is the best? No, because if I knew what it meant to be the best, I would be the best. So, to claim you can assess who is best, without basing it on raw numbers, but on your observations as a player who can't win online yourself, credibility is lacking.

And btw, according to the rough estimates of high stakes database...Brandon adams is down big in holdem and in omaha...i am not saying he can't make judgements, but his assessments of who is who and what is what are really not that meaningful since he doesn't play poker as well as many online players.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
brandon adams and kenny tran are both DOWN money playing online...if you cant win online you shouldnt be putting yourself in a category above online. While there may be an added element to play live (an element barry greenstein says is widely overrated), online is very straight up and real poker and neither player is successful there. this makes their credibility in discussing the top players quite iffy.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to have cancer to research/analyze/understand it...even if what you're saying is really true...which I'm not really corroborating.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well actually, in some ways, you do...since chess has been brought up...if no one kept track of results of chess players, who would you trust in telling you who the best players are? Kasparov who beat everyone he played? Or me, a decent player who studied the game? Am I in the position to determine who is the best? No, because if I knew what it meant to be the best, I would be the best. So, to claim you can assess who is best, without basing it on raw numbers, but on your observations as a player who can't win online yourself, credibility is lacking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assessment and practice need not be mutually inclusive in the realm of understanding...and they're definately not exhaustive...

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
everything is good except the part about live NL pros beating internet pros in a live deep stacked game. the live NL pros are beating soft games, none of them have been able to win in big games online, when they do my opinion will change.

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[/ QUOTE ]

yep

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
everything is good except the part about live NL pros beating internet pros in a live deep stacked game. the live NL pros are beating soft games, none of them have been able to win in big games online, when they do my opinion will change.

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[/ QUOTE ]

yep

[/ QUOTE ]


Concur. Talk is VERY VERY cheap. Tran has no business putting himself in a class above the people he has currently only lost money to at FTP. If Sammy Farha does not lose huge in the big game everyone talks about, and he plays AA the way he did vs Gold, then that game frankly isn't THAT tough. Anyone that weak at a difficult online table would be crushed.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

I for one enjoyed the article. Thanks

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Decent article. I like the idea of kids in the future being groomed for poker the way they are for tennis now, or like Tiger was for golf. There really is no "Tiger Woods of poker" right now because nobody was raised from birth and coached their whole life with the goal of beating poker.

I think people underestimate how important technical play is and overvalue the impressive unorthodox plays someone like Kenny makes. Kenny might play the river amazingly well, might be able to make great reads, etc. etc. but if he makes big technical errors he is easy to beat. There are already a lot of people like BT who play very very good technical hold'em, and they will only get better, and so many people just don't understand that balanced/randomized technical play is not exploitable, while on the other hand technical errors against a near-game-theory opponent will definitely lead to long term money loss.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Nice article.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

There will never be a Woods or Federer of poker because the variance plays such a roll. If anything the evolution of the game will make it harder for someone to dominate.

If Tran feels he and others are better players it seems they could adapt to the internet games.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Brandon is down online?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
Brandon is down online?

[/ QUOTE ] He is down huge online...at least at 50/100 and up...and i know HSDB is not 100% accurate, but rarely does it show a 1.2 mil dog who is actually a winner..

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

so how long do you guys think it will be till something opens up for the poker world similar to the Bollettieri Tennis Academy where parents send their kids off to become poker prodigies?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Brandon,

I'm dying of some Kenny Tran sickness. Please provide some hand histories where on the river, Tran does something that shows he's the second coming of Genius28.

PS. Broke was an enjoyable read.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]

PS. Broke was an enjoyable read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good to know I'm not the only one who ordered and read that. I'll say it was certainly better than the pretentious garbage that was Positively Fifth Street.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
There will never be a Woods or Federer of poker because the variance plays such a roll.


[/ QUOTE ]


I agree with this.

These discussions of who is the greatest and who is the best always make me uncomfortable, because the variance in poker makes it almost impossible to judge a player unless you are an expert yourself in the relevant game, AND you have extensive playing experience with the person in question.

Add to that the fact that there are many different niches within poker (tourneys, cash games, limit, NL, etc.) and the fact that people have different motivations and risk tolerances, and I feel like these discussions are kind of futile, at least among outside observers.

Much love for BA though. This was way more original and intelligent than 99% of what is written about the poker world.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

I want to add a little more.

One problem with 'tracking' poker players is that to the extent that poker is a moneymaking activity and not an end in itself, the best players often move on to completely different things, which judging from the OP might be misinterpreted as failure or burnout.

Take Howard for example. However good he may have been, now that he's making $100 gajillion a year why would he spend any more time on poker than pure enjoyment leads him to?

Also look at Doyle and Chip. Contrary to popular image they have not been playing high limit poker 24-7 for the last 30 years.

They went through spans of multiple years where their primary interests were sports betting or business ventures or who knows what.

The problem is that due to the impossibility of real, objective, widely shared ratings of player skill, there is no real glory in poker the way there is in chess or tennis or many other competitive activies. There is no heavyweight title to devote your career to winning. It's just the endless ebb and flow of money won and lost.

So the only real drives are fun/compulsion and making money. And different people are motivated to very different degrees depending on their personality and situation in life.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

I agree w/ mic man.

The thing is, the general public may view the WSOP main event as the Wimbledon of poker, but any real poker player knows that it's just the powerball of poker.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

The story of my poker life in 07 is that I was a big loser online, but I was the biggest or second biggest winner in live poker from May-August. On the whole, that has left me pretty flush.

My online play has suffered from some bad life management... I've been living a bit too fast, trying to do everything on a high level. It is ridiculous to play the biggest online games in hotel rooms while you are on respite from the biggest live games, and, yet, this is what I've been doing. Moreover, I basically didn't have a home from May-early November, and I was dealing with the stress of a broken engagement. I feel that my level of poker knowledge is at a world-class level, and in the past (especially 05) that led me to good success online, but this year my online endeavors have been a failure. I can't say how much of that is due to variance and how much is due to bad play.

Here's a good illustration of the difference b/w live and online....
David Peat (Viffer) is one of the best live NL regulars. Online play is all about optimizing one's bluffing/value-betting ratio based on the tendencies of your opponents. Well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

Brandon

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

So at age 31 I'm basically screwed ?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain this, as it makes no sense to me.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Don't worry about it if all you want is to make money. Even the richest poker player is no way close to the Forbes' list.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

having any percentage of a certain play at 0 can not be anything close to optimal no matter what

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]

Here's a good illustration of the difference b/w live and online....
David Peat (Viffer) is one of the best live NL regulars. Online play is all about optimizing one's bluffing/value-betting ratio based on the tendencies of your opponents. Well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sick.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

having any percentage of a certain play at 0 can not be anything close to optimal no matter what

[/ QUOTE ]
If your cards are face up (essentially what hes saying) yes it is.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

I didn't read all the replies so I don't know if this has been said and i suspect it has, but isn't it possible that a federer or 'perfect' player of poker has actually evolved but can't gain near perfect results or results as good as federer due to the luck and swings involved in poker?

I mean I'm sure if poker magically had no luck involved (can't really see how that's possible lol) wouldnt it be safe to say that the best online players (or player if there is one) would win almost every match they played like federer does? or that ivey would win almost every live match he plays?

I don't really know much about poker so just speculating, and also isn't it the same with chess because chess is a game of perfect knowledge and poker isnt?

Great post though hit on some very good points

Edit: Just had a change of heart and read the replies and someone said it doesn't matter about poker not being perfect information because of a lack of 'complete skills', but how do we know?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

kenny sure did pick off the river bluff that knocked him out of the main event..

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

having any percentage of a certain play at 0 can not be anything close to optimal no matter what

[/ QUOTE ]
If your cards are face up (essentially what hes saying) yes it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

but the cards arent face up...especially after a few months of kenny knowing he wont bluff him

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

having any percentage of a certain play at 0 can not be anything close to optimal no matter what

[/ QUOTE ]
If your cards are face up (essentially what hes saying) yes it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

but the cards arent face up...especially after a few months of kenny knowing he wont bluff him

[/ QUOTE ]

If Kenny always knows when your bluffing optimal bluffing percentage is 0.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

good article, thx

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

totally awesome article

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Very interesting read. Although this is ridiculously small-sample and anecdotal, I wonder about the stress/ageing point. It's remarkable how many of my poker-playing friends around the same age (late 30s early 40s) look much, much younger. Then again, none of us have any kids, that might also be a factor :-)

Also

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't read all the replies so I don't know if this has been said and i suspect it has, but isn't it possible that a federer or 'perfect' player of poker has actually evolved but can't gain near perfect results or results as good as federer due to the luck and swings involved in poker?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's Hellmuth [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

If fold equity against one of the players at the table is a complete 0 dosnt that make even sitting at the table a huge -ev decision? how can you win money that way?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
If fold equity against one of the players at the table is a complete 0 dosnt that make even sitting at the table a huge -ev decision? how can you win money that way?

[/ QUOTE ]

how can u win money against someone that never folds? really?

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

Think we got a good example of how sick good live players can play the river on the first hand of HSP last night.

Re: The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs onlin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, for six months, Viffer had a policy of never bluffing Kenny. That is, if he bet big on the river against Kenny, he was never bluffing. For him, that was optimal... if Kenny knows when you're bluffing, your optimal bluffing percentage is 0. Something like that just makes no sense in the context of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

having any percentage of a certain play at 0 can not be anything close to optimal no matter what

[/ QUOTE ]
If your cards are face up (essentially what hes saying) yes it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

but the cards arent face up...especially after a few months of kenny knowing he wont bluff him

[/ QUOTE ]

If Kenny always knows when your bluffing optimal bluffing percentage is 0.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only way your bluffing % can be zero is if you only bet when you have the nuts - doesn't that present a few problems?