Real interesting question
 

Howard Lederer wrote an article on the Full Tilt website about specialization. He said not to stick to one game- he said to play alot of games because you might find the one your best at and most importantly to me, that it would make you a better overall player and BETTER AT YOUR CHOSEN GAME (for me No Limit HE). I dont really agree. Do you guys?

Re: Real interesting question
 

Different angles arise at different rates in different games. Learn rare angles quicker in unfamiliar games, take knowledge back to yours. Crossover. Then crossbackover. Yes.

Re: Real interesting question
 

Ev time im running horrible or tilting in hold em I play some omaha..I really do think it balances my play in both

Re: Real interesting question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Howard Lederer wrote an article on the Full Tilt website about specialization. He said not to stick to one game- he said to play alot of games because you might find the one your best at and most importantly to me, that it would make you a better overall player and BETTER AT YOUR CHOSEN GAME (for me No Limit HE). I dont really agree. Do you guys?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that learning NLHE made me a better LHE player, and knowing LHE gave me a good head start to NLHE. When we got into Pineapple and then mixed games the concepts became easier to apply to new games.

Zolotow brought up a good point in Super System also... that the popularity of certain games come and go. I think NLHE is so popular that you won't have a problem finding a game for a long time, though, and I think you should be pretty strong at it, but I think NLHE is wearing on a lot of casual players. As time goes on I think you'll see some of that interest runoff to other games.

The other games give you different perspectives. Because I played limit games first, for example, I started in NHLE with a strong sense of how important getting max value on my good hands and minimizing my losses, and that every dollar made or saved matters.

Re: Real interesting question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Howard Lederer wrote an article on the Full Tilt website about specialization. He said not to stick to one game- he said to play alot of games because you might find the one your best at and most importantly to me, that it would make you a better overall player and BETTER AT YOUR CHOSEN GAME (for me No Limit HE). I dont really agree. Do you guys?

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing other games makes you think about poker more generally, which helps you to think in a stronger way about your chosen game. Almost every player I know would benefit from expanding the strategic scope of how they think about poker.

Re: Real interesting question
 

I also agree that playing more games aids in your development/understanding of metagame concepts. This, in turn, can strengthen your understanding of your specialty game(s). It's fine to have a specialty, but confining yourself to a single game has a potential fallacy. That is, players who play a single game tend to not have the deep theoretical understanding (in my experience) needed to continue to develop as a poker player.

Re: Real interesting question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I also agree that playing more games aids in your development/understanding of metagame concepts. This, in turn, can strengthen your understanding of your specialty game(s). It's fine to have a specialty, but confining yourself to a single game has a potential fallacy. That is, players who play a single game tend to not have the deep theoretical understanding (in my experience) needed to continue to develop as a poker player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Deep theoretical understanding.....read The Theory of Poker a bunch of times will do the trick no? is it really?necessary to divulge into Omaha, Limit, Stud, god knows what else? i mean if your trying to get better why not just focus your time getting better at your specialty.

Re: Real interesting question
 

Reading a book "a bunch of times" is not likely to award you a deep theoretical understanding of the game (or anything for that matter). You need to be thinking critically about poker, as Jerrod pointed out. Theory of Poker suggests where you may want to focus your thoughts, but just rereading and memorizing the book will probably do very little for you. Playing multiple games gives you a different experience and can have a profound impact on the way you think about poker as well.

Re: Real interesting question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Reading a book "a bunch of times" is not likely to award you a deep theoretical understanding of the game (or anything for that matter). You need to be thinking critically about poker, as Jerrod pointed out. Theory of Poker suggests where you may want to focus your thoughts, but just rereading and memorizing the book will probably do very little for you. Playing multiple games gives you a different experience and can have a profound impact on the way you think about poker as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're right. I guess I'm trying to be lazy and sidestep a possibly vital aspect of becoming a real good no limit player. I still want to build a roll playing no limit though, and then divulge into other games to get better at poker. I just thought of a great argument for your case- Far and away best NLHE player ever, Stu Ungar. Guy played every card game known to man (at a high level, including many forms of poker) before he started playing No-limit,( and i think it really helped him with card sense.

Re: Real interesting question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I also agree that playing more games aids in your development/understanding of metagame concepts. This, in turn, can strengthen your understanding of your specialty game(s). It's fine to have a specialty, but confining yourself to a single game has a potential fallacy. That is, players who play a single game tend to not have the deep theoretical understanding (in my experience) needed to continue to develop as a poker player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Deep theoretical understanding.....read The Theory of Poker a bunch of times will do the trick no? is it really?necessary to divulge into Omaha, Limit, Stud, god knows what else? i mean if your trying to get better why not just focus your time getting better at your specialty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the peculiar applications of concepts of other games should help you expand your thinking, and give you different ideas on how to apply those same concepts to your own speciality.

This carries over to a lot of fields. If you play guitar, for example, you can learn a lot by experimenting with another instrument (or even another variation of your own).

Regarding ToP, even that is easier to absorb if you're at least familiar with the most common games. More than that, there are publications in particular games that explain some concepts very well that aren't found in other games. Dan Harrington's books are written for NLHE tournaments, but some concepts are applicable to other games being played in tourney format - even limit games. Short stack strategy found in Ed Miller's hold'em book transfers well to Omaha with a little adjustment too.

I guess you have to ask yourself whether you want to be a poker player, or a no limit hold'em player.