[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts on:

Marccus85
Fumbo420
Kelistaan(this guy is always discussed)
lifegoeson
Tru_Dat
The_Minion

Those are ones that I see at the tables constantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

They're all blah and Fumbo is mega bizarre. I refer to these players as a whole as "oddity nits" cause thats the only general way to describe them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm confused at why you think you're a poker god.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think I'm a poker God so much as I think that everyone else overrates themselves and the people they play with. Basically the majority of regulars in any given level are bad up through 5/10 in my opinion. By bad I do not mean losing player, but marginal winner or worse.

To rephrase, I don't think I'm that good, I just think poker is easy because everyone else is bad. People simply don't practice poker as much as they do chess, baseball etc. and thus it's easy to be far ahead in the learning curve in this game, or far behind. Also there are plenty of regulars on extended heaters who play short bi rules and are susceptible to tilt meltdowns etc. (Which makes it easier for the bad nits to prosper)

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh.

I think we're comparing a players' skills to the competition he plays against and nothing more.

We do this so that we can have a better feel for what the player is trying to do and so we can table select better.

Of course there's hardly any great players playing small/micro stakes.

Comparing players in a vacuum wouldn't really be helpful anyways.