Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

Obviously, the more you talk during a hand the more chance that you may "give away" info that will hurt you. We have seen this several times, a few with Daniel.

But overall, I think the more vocal players (Gold, Zeidman, Farha) are weaker BECAUSE of this tendancy. Guys like Gus, Doyle, Todd, Antonio are overall better players because they give so little away.

A few talk during hands (like Daniel) but basically only to themselves and not with more streets to come, so I don't consider that the same or damaging.

Anyone else agree with this "generality"?

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

I talk a ton but any time I make a decent sized bet (bluff of not) I stfu.

Edit: I wouldn't put Negreanu and Farha in the same class as Jamie Gold and Cory Zeidman.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

I didn't put Daniel in the same group. I think Farha does talk too much but he offsets his bad play by being very aggresive and ragging out a bit more. But on the whole, I think he's a loser on this show (before this week).

If I had a choice of backing Brad Booth or Sammy Farha, I'd easily go with Brad.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

antonio talks a lot what are you smoking

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

You're looking at this a bit in the wrong way. There are two types of players that get noticed enough for you to know about them. A few are actually good players. The rest are [censored] who talk a lot or who wear stupid sweatshirts and stuff.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

He doesn't talk much during the hand, ie: speculating. I don't see him giving anything away about his hand. The others I mentioned are always "well, I got a big hand, I can't lay this down" etc.

The longer this banter goes on, the more likely they are to give away key info.

Jamie does it, so badly, that I don't think he could ever beat these guys without getting hit in the head with the deck. Farha does it alot, and I see him losing more than winning. The really quiet ones, Booth, Hansen, Lederer... the list goes on and on... they seem to win more/higher than the mouthy ones.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't put Daniel in the same group. I think Farha does talk too much but he offsets his bad play by being very aggresive and ragging out a bit more. But on the whole, I think he's a loser on this show (before this week).

If I had a choice of backing Brad Booth or Sammy Farha, I'd easily go with Brad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sammy has taken LAG to a new level, and his image allows him to profit from monster holdings. This season he hasn't had too many monsters, and if he gets hit by the deck, he is liable to go from a loser to a huge winner, very quickly.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

The main difference bet Daniel and Jamie is Daniel mostly speaks when he is the defender. It's already clear that Daniel is in a call or fold mode. His talking didn't give any information. By just thinking it known that Daniel has a decision to make. Therefore no additional information.
Jamie talks when he's the bettor. Players should remain silent when they're the aggressor. Only two things can happen. One is neutral and the another is bad.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're looking at this a bit in the wrong way. There are two types of players that get noticed enough for you to know about them. A few are actually good players. The rest are [censored] who talk a lot or who wear stupid sweatshirts and stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ding ! Selection bias strikes yet again.

Re: Are the more vocal players weaker?
 

Players like Daniel Negreanu, Jamie Gold, and Gavin Smith talk a lot because its the way they play and they want there opponent to think they are giving a lot of information away