Best Full Tilt 5/10 Regular?

[Melchiades]

You are the one that cares. You got your knickers in a twist when people didn't mention you or all your 2-tabling homies name in their best list.

[cumicon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no way someone that sounds as retarded as you could be one of the best players. Care to share your screen name?

[/ QUOTE ]

so because i don't enjoy playing 8 tables or playing 80 hours a week that makes me retarded?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's your idea of what makes someone a good player that is retarded. And keep in mind that the poker tracker screenshot is in ptbb/100.

[mj2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no way someone that sounds as retarded as you could be one of the best players. Care to share your screen name?

[/ QUOTE ]

so because i don't enjoy playing 8 tables or playing 80 hours a week that makes me retarded?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's your idea of what makes someone a good player that is retarded. And keep in mind that the poker tracker screenshot is in ptbb/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think someone who averages close to 5 ptbb/100 (sorry that i said bb/100 earlier) over a large sample of hands is a good player. but i also think that a good player uses good table selection (doesn't let their ego get in the way), doesn't tilt, and plays within their bankroll. those intangibles are not going to show up in any poker tracker screen shot. so what exactly is so retarded about that?

[cumicon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no way someone that sounds as retarded as you could be one of the best players. Care to share your screen name?

[/ QUOTE ]

so because i don't enjoy playing 8 tables or playing 80 hours a week that makes me retarded?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's your idea of what makes someone a good player that is retarded. And keep in mind that the poker tracker screenshot is in ptbb/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think someone who averages close to 5 ptbb/100 (sorry that i said bb/100 earlier) over a large sample of hands is a good player. but i also think that a good player uses good table selection (doesn't let their ego get in the way), doesn't tilt, and plays within their bankroll. those intangibles are not going to show up in any poker tracker screen shot. so what exactly is so retarded about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

None of that is retarded. It was your idea that someone 8 tabling at 3ptbb/100 is not a top player, and that most of the best players are only playing a couple tables.

[soah]

You say that those guys are making the most money via volume of hands, but aren't actually the best players because their ptbb/100 isn't the best. But then you start talking about how they frequently sit in lousy games while other players with better winrates can sit in softer games. Doesn't this defeat the entire premise of your argument? If they were to only sit at the best games, then wouldn't their winrates rise to match what the best 3-tablers have?

Then you start talking about how game selection is an important skill in being a good player. if game selection counts as a skill, then why doesn't 8-tabling count as a skill? if they are making more money 8-tabling than what anyone can make by game-selecting, then it seems like 8-tabling is a more important skill.

So basically, your arguments are completely inconsistent.

[Jeffmet3]

[ QUOTE ]

i think someone who averages close to 5 ptbb/100 (sorry that i said bb/100 earlier) over a large sample of hands is a good player. but i also think that a good player uses good table selection (doesn't let their ego get in the way), doesn't tilt, and plays within their bankroll. those intangibles are not going to show up in any poker tracker screen shot. so what exactly is so retarded about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

i think you're one of the best regulars. happy?

[BalugaWhale]

godfckkign bandmit dshwo me some love over here bayby

[cts]

whats ur sn mj2 ?

[mj2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i think someone who averages close to 5 ptbb/100 (sorry that i said bb/100 earlier) over a large sample of hands is a good player. but i also think that a good player uses good table selection (doesn't let their ego get in the way), doesn't tilt, and plays within their bankroll. those intangibles are not going to show up in any poker tracker screen shot. so what exactly is so retarded about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

i think you're one of the best regulars. happy?

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mj2]

[ QUOTE ]
whats ur sn mj2 ?

[/ QUOTE ]

why? so people can post screen shots and tell me how much i suck? lol. no thanks.

i never said i was the best. i never even said i should be even considered. first of all, i haven't played 5/10 or 10/20 that long. i'm a very average player. there are some great players on that list. i play with those people every day. i just think some people are clearly missing. muckemsayuh for one. he is one of the best players i've played against and he wasn't even an option. also, the leading vote getter is averaging 1.48 bb/100 over 150,000 hands. thats just not that impressive to me even if he is 8 tabling.

playing more tables is a choice, like playing more hours. do you think i only play 3 tables or even 2 tables because that is all i can handle? you're joking right? i just don't like playing more. it becomes boring. it becomes a "grind" just like they call it. and also, i don't like the tables that small. yes, i have a 21" monitor and it still seems too small to me. i shrink the tables enough to have 2 on the screen with basically no overlap and put my 3rd table on my 17" monitor. i don't know. maybe i am the only one who is not 8 tableing. i didn't think i was but after this post i'm starting to be convinced.