The Life Cycle of a Poker Player (and my thoughts on live vs online)

[nycballer]

everything is good except the part about live NL pros beating internet pros in a live deep stacked game. the live NL pros are beating soft games, none of them have been able to win in big games online, when they do my opinion will change.

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[Ansky]

[ QUOTE ]
everything is good except the part about live NL pros beating internet pros in a live deep stacked game. the live NL pros are beating soft games, none of them have been able to win in big games online, when they do my opinion will change.

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[/ QUOTE ]

yep

[jeff329]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
everything is good except the part about live NL pros beating internet pros in a live deep stacked game. the live NL pros are beating soft games, none of them have been able to win in big games online, when they do my opinion will change.

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[/ QUOTE ]

yep

[/ QUOTE ]


Concur. Talk is VERY VERY cheap. Tran has no business putting himself in a class above the people he has currently only lost money to at FTP. If Sammy Farha does not lose huge in the big game everyone talks about, and he plays AA the way he did vs Gold, then that game frankly isn't THAT tough. Anyone that weak at a difficult online table would be crushed.

[innerpeace]

[ QUOTE ]

and its ridiculous to think that the only part great about aba is his analytical skills and that his "instincts" aren't on the level of kenny tran(lol)

[/ QUOTE ]

while both players might rely on their instincts, their instincts are honed in much different ways. aba seems to be much more analytic, and his instincts have been likely been honed by going over tons of hands, thinking about opponent betting patterns, and making many equity calculations. kenny makes excellent live reads based on many subtle cues - though honestly i haven't played very many live hours with kenny. i have played more with phil ivey and both almost seem like they are privy to more information than other people at the table. i can't think of a single online player that might be capable of making these types of reads.

online reads are mostly based on the history with the opponent, betting patterns and some timing tells. live reads are based on a whole lot more. that allows the best live players to narrow down their opponent's range giving them the opportunity to potentially make more profitable decisions. this skill is critical on the river when pots are the biggest and hands can be more defined. live games also play much more deep stacked and bigger, making decisions on later streets even more critical than you might see in online games.

[Deewhizzle]

Wow!! check out the writing skillz on BA...in all seriousness though, awsome,awsome post sir, Much respect. this fourm needs more thoughout provoking post as such.
again thank you.

[Nick Rivers]

[ QUOTE ]
The level of skill that Gary Kasparov in his prime exhibited on a chess table has never been matched by anyone on the green felt. This is open to argument, but I believe it to be obviously true and I think there is a deep reason for it. Poker wears people down.
Forget for a moment the degeneracy that surrounds poker. The poker world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation, but we will ignore for a moment the effect of these things on one’s abilities over time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The chess world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation as well. Professional chess players are every bit the degenerates that professional poker players are so, in that sense, this aspect of the contrast between chess and poker is invalid.

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The level of skill that Gary Kasparov in his prime exhibited on a chess table has never been matched by anyone on the green felt. This is open to argument, but I believe it to be obviously true and I think there is a deep reason for it. Poker wears people down.
Forget for a moment the degeneracy that surrounds poker. The poker world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation, but we will ignore for a moment the effect of these things on one’s abilities over time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The chess world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation as well. Professional chess players are every bit the degenerates that professional poker players are so, in that sense, this aspect of the contrast between chess and poker is invalid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was just about to say the exact same thing. It is extremely naive to say the chess world is significantly more 'pure' than poker. Many, and perhaps the majority of, world class chess players are just complete degenerates. Chess is another game that can just really take over your life. Players ending their lives alone, mentally deranged, impovershed, and with substance abuse problems is far from uncommon. Not a good comparison at all.

[jogsxyz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The chess world is rife with addiction, drug and alcohol use, depression, and sleep deprivation as well. Professional chess players are every bit the degenerates that professional poker players are so, in that sense, this aspect of the contrast between chess and poker is invalid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was just about to say the exact same thing. It is extremely naive to say the chess world is significantly more 'pure' than poker. Many, and perhaps the majority of, world class chess players are just complete degenerates. Chess is another game that can just really take over your life. Players ending their lives alone, mentally deranged, impovershed, and with substance abuse problems is far from uncommon. Not a good comparison at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Walter Browne managed two final tables in this year's WSOP.

[Dire]

Another issue I have with this article is correlation vs causation. You see lots of youthful players dominating the online poker scene, so you imply youthful players must have some natural learning advantage over older players. While you mention that brain function tends to decline with age, you offer no further elaboration.

Have you considered the issues of time, motivation, etc? Online poker is a game that requires thousands of hours of work and effort to reach the top in, not to mention the motivation to begin playing online in the first place. Who is more likely to be able to put in the thousands of hours it takes to master this game - teenagers or 25+ adults? Who is more likely to have the motivation and trust to deposit onto some online poker site in the first place?

There is a direct analog for this in chess as well. Is Victor Kortchnoj a freak somehow able to bypass 'brain decay', or does he simply maintain the motivation that many players lose as they age?

[Somnius]

[ QUOTE ]
There are mounds of evidence suggesting that even relatively mild stress can damage the brain’s frontal lobes and impair learning and memory.
It’s well known that brain function (especially the ability to learn new skills) declines with age, starting at about age nineteen. I’m speculating that poker accelerates this process, but we should expect strong life cycle tendencies even if this is not the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although the neurophysiological hormonal fluctuations of the poker player may be more dramatic, or more prevalent then the average professional, is it not worth noting that poker also comes with a great decrease in stressors very prevalent in the traditional acceleration of career x or in academia?

It's almost as if a poker player's neurobiological life cycle may be condensed on one hand, but lengthened on another.

Stressors such as waking up at a certain time (early), working under a boss, meeting deadlines, forced geographical constants, regimented time dispersion through the day with pronounced lack of control...all these stressors are virtually eliminated from the poker player's life cycle.

Of course, the potential for general gambling/"free-living" negative tendencies such as addiction, drug and alcohol abuse, extremely unregimented living etc are all very likely. Nevertheless, acknowledging all factors in the equation, can it really be simply said that the life of a poker pro will bring about the expected neurodegeneration and/or life cycle deconstruction any faster then the multitude of other careers and paths that are both cause and effect to highly motivated, highly achieving, more stressed-living individuals?

Although more of a rhetorical question, it is a worthwhile consideration in your notion that top players of the future need begin their path of mastery around the same time the frontal lobes start earning their place at the front of the line. If the lack of stressors readily available in the traditional career make up for the inclusion of potential stressors that follow a poker pro around, then perhaps it doesn't need to be so different.

As you mentioned, proper bankroll management is of course a key consideration. Lack of addiction also an important factor in halting the stress-induced frontal lobe degradation.

All careers have their stressors, all high-level achieving is not without dire cost to our health. Poker allows for even more life control and thus potentially less stress responses then most other professional endeavours. Of course, we're not robots, it's not as simple as it is on paper, and generally, most will allow the potential negatives of a "free-life", a life of "gambling" to become very much a reality and potentially confirm your speculation.

The top poker players of the future will see it very much as a business like any other, and be disciplined enough to approach it as the "robot" described above.