Just how young (and why) are the top players online?

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the old guys who are defending Doyle's play is the perfect irony to encapsulate why the young guys are the ones crushing... No further explanation necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I can determine poker breaks down to knowing what they have and knowing what they'll do.

PA was wrong about what he had and wrong about what he'd do. For that he lost half his stack.

DB was right about what he had and right about what he'd do. For that he took the chip lead.

People are calling PA's play great and DB's play horrible.

I don't get it.

It's a lot like the pros who bust out in the ME and leave complaining about the unbluffable fish. Well, why are you bluffing unbluffable fish? Who's really the idiot here? Right about what they had but wrong about what they'd do? To the rail ye go...

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't even bother, friend. Let the fish who think they're experts continue losing when they shouldn't. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't profess to be an expert at NL. Hell, I don't profess to even being good at NL. But, I can see why Doyle's play is horrible, and it's simple logic and simple poker theory to understand why. If you can't, don't go ragging on those who can. I'm not calling PA's play brilliant, but the fact is, Doyle's play is bad. 33 is not a trapping hand. What is he hoping for, a coin flip? He's either a coinflip, or a huge dog, calling a huge bet with barely anything invested. The play is to raise preflop, and if you limp, it is to fold once PA goes all in. You could call Doyle's play brilliant if he had A8. He had 33. He got very lucky PA had A2. You are looking at the hand in the simplest way possible, which is the results. Stop being so fuggin results oriented and examine things from a RANGE of hands. I bet you're the kind of guy who justifies all his plays by the results of what happened, rather than looking at things analytically/mathematically/logically. The simple fact is, Doyle was not some genius this hand. He gambled. He was hoping he was up against a coin flip. He had no clue if he was or wasn't.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the old guys who are defending Doyle's play is the perfect irony to encapsulate why the young guys are the ones crushing... No further explanation necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

With due respect, you don't appear to know what irony means . . . no further explanation necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody knows what irony means anymore. i blame it on sportscastors.

[sdfsdf]

[ QUOTE ]

There is nothing about any of this that is particularly hard. Real careers are harder. You don't have to be a genius to beat most players. You don't need any particular computer savvy or manual dexterity to multi-table. Powers of concentration are not among the attributes that wain with age (see Georg Solti).

[/ QUOTE ]
lol @ people who think poker isn't hard. if its so easy, why aren't you playing the highest stakes possible yet? making enough $ to play the next highest stake takes like 1-2 weeks if you're multitabling and winning.

[MaxRaises]

Young players tend to not care as much about the money because we don't have wives/kids/mortgages. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[mirrorman]

the younger you are, the cooler it is to play poker.

younger players are more motivated because if they do well, they're "LIVING THE LIFE", whereas older people are just making additional money on top of their actual job. if you are young and rich, you're hot [censored]. but if you're old and rich, you're just another person with a lot of money and the cool aspect doesn't even exist.

[arcdog]

this is an easy one - poker is a game that OVER TIME rewards the smartest and most skilled. That said, until very recently (the last four or so years), very few of our smartest and most skilled citizens were willing to engulf themselves in the game. If the poker boom had occurred 15 years ago, you'd have numerous mid-30s players that are the equivalent of the young guns cited here.

[Schneids]

anyway my actual reason for posting was to point out that [in general] older people are more "stuck in their ways," and too stubborn to explore other possibilities [therefore thwarting potential growth into greatness], which, as it turns out in this thread, is what has happened by some of the older folks who are defending Doyle's play in the 33 hand, because "hey look at the results he got it in as the big favorite."

[Crane]

[ QUOTE ]
The simple fact is, Doyle was not some genius this hand. He gambled. He was hoping he was up against a coin flip. He had no clue if he was or wasn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're a smart guy and probably a hell of a player. I'm guessing you're probably a better than me. He'll, all of you young guys are probably better than me.

But I think the last sentence in your statement is flat out wrong.

Doyle had a clue all right. PA bet way too much money. Doyle read it right-- he assumed he had the winning side of a coin flip--and then he decided to gamble.

How many times do you think he's made that decision in his life?

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The simple fact is, Doyle was not some genius this hand. He gambled. He was hoping he was up against a coin flip. He had no clue if he was or wasn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're a smart guy and probably a hell of a player. I'm guessing you're probably a better than me. He'll, all of you young guys are probably better than me.

But I think the last sentence in your statement is flat out wrong.

Doyle had a clue all right. PA bet way too much money. Doyle read it right-- he assumed he had the winning side of a coin flip--and then he decided to gamble.

How many times do you think he's made that decision in his life?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess only PA can know for sure if his preflop range in this situation can or would include 44-AA. If it does not, your statement contains some truth. IMO, it does, as others have pointed out PA was playing very aggressively and would have to be expecting at some point Doyle might try to trap him.

Anyway, it's a certainty that if Doyle is going to call an all in with 33, his overall equity in the hand is larger by simply pushing himself because of the fold equity he gains with his vulnerable 33.

[suzy89222]

obviously there are a combination of reasons, but i think the biggest one is that the average age of ALL internet players is probably about 24.