A5s in blind battle.

[PrayingMantis]

A sign of intelligence is being able to deliver complex ideas in a simple manner. baltosar is doing the complete opposite, i.e, delivering simple ideas in a way-over-the-top complex manner, which is one of the most annoying things anyone can do, regardless of how much merit these ideas have (They do have some BTW, but are much less deep or revolutionary than what baltosar seems to think).

This is a known (although relatively rare) disease on 2+2, and not very surprisingly, it's usually found at posts written by ex-"successful traders" who have switched to poker, for some unknown reason.

From this little article (I randomly just found) about excess verbiage:

"The use of excess verbiage is not so much a flaw in reasoning but a flaw in the argument process because of the way it inhibits communication and is a barrier to a proper evaluation of a person's ideas. Nevertheless, because such a style makes it difficult for others to understand what a person is saying, it is reasonable to wonder if perhaps it is also a sign that the author herself fails to understand what she is saying.

Although it cannot be assumed that one always leads to the other, it is true that an incoherent presentation of ideas is often a sign of incoherent thinking and an inadequate understanding of the ideas involved. People who have a very good grasp of what they are explaining are usually able to present their material in a clear and coherent manner. In order to determine whether this is the case instead of some other reason (like those described above), simply tell the person that it is difficult to get through their explanation, ask them to simplify it, and see what happens."

[baltostar]

[ QUOTE ]
A sign of intelligence is being able to deliver complex ideas in a simple manner. baltosar is doing the complete opposite, i.e, delivering simple ideas in a way-over-the-top complex manner, which is one of the most annoying things anyone can do, regardless of how much merit these ideas have (They do have some BTW, but are much less deep or revolutionary than what baltosar seems to think).

[/ QUOTE ]

When did I say I thought is was deep and revolutionary. I said I have noticed persistent and pervasive thought patterns on these boards that are detrimental to good players' games because the patterns are based on certain flawed assumptions about tournament risk.

Those with any background in reading articles on risk management will recognize that my language is relatively terse and simple by comparison. In fact, when I used to write for trading sites, people gave me a lot of credit for explaining risk ideas in a straightforward manner.

I'd say this forum is way way way on the "few words as possible" scale. Not saying that's bad, but it's not always appropriate.

Problem 1: a small but decent % of what people say is way open to interpretation (it's not exact enough)

Problem 2: bare-bones talk can't really describe general concepts in risk

When I've used relatively a lot of words, it is to describe general concepts of risk. Concepts of risk are very tricky to describe in the english language because they orignate and are best-described in the language of mathematics.

Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[djk123]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[/ QUOTE ]

neither really. and you focus way too much on "risk management" or whatever

[curtains]

This thread is retardo?

[gobboboy]

[ QUOTE ]


Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rather makeout with Bill Chen than read what you write.

[WarDekar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rather makeout with Bill Chen than read what you write.

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone's got yellow feva, gobbo's got yellow feeevaa

[auc hincloss]

[ QUOTE ]

you repeat some common ideas and just use a stronger vocabulary in a way to confuse the reader so much that they assume it's right. If MLG/Shaniac or some other really sick mtter who doesn't post much posted the same things it would be taken as pure gold whether it was right or not. It sucks bt the inverse is true you posting what you did will be dismissed before it's even read. When I read it I see what you are saying and it's not as revolutionary and different as you think we just didn't articulate it like you.


[/ QUOTE ]

completely agree with whats sean [censored] deeb just said.


[ QUOTE ]

Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather read poker for dummies.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
When did I say I thought is was deep and revolutionary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it is very clear from the way you phrase your posts and ideas. You also specifically admit, at the very next sentence you write, at noticing "thought patterns on these boards that are detrimental to good players' games". In other words, you have a "deeper" understanding of this game than some long term winners who are posting here.

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, when I used to write for trading sites, people gave me a lot of credit for explaining risk ideas in a straightforward manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Risk ideas" with regard to MTTs were discussed on these boards and elsewhere for ages. Your way of "explaining" it is rather poor actually, and again, there's nothing new about it.



[ QUOTE ]
Would you rather read what I write or what Chen writes in The Mathematics of Poker ?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is really a laughable comparison. First, I have never got annoyed reading Chen's book (regardless if I understood some stuff in it or not). Your posts are annoying as hell. Second, and much more importantly, Chen actually suggests a rather interesting (some of it new) perspective on the analysis of poker hands. Your posts are much more like a teenager who is trying to impress his friends by talking about football using words he heard the day before in a TV show about "quantum mechanics" (on the discovery channel).

[Ansky]

PrayingMantis,

Yofehhhhhhhhhhhhh [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]