|
|
|
|
#1
11-15-2007, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think the big issue I get from this post is how much live poker can suck in the sense that it takes so long to get to the long run that its easy to get disheartened along the way. Thank gods for the internet. Even though someone like ansky or daryn could have been stuck 4 months into the year they will almost never have a losing year whereas in live MTTs you can be the best player in the world and go over a year as a losing player easy. [/ QUOTE ] I think we need to define what the long run is. I think the long run is from the time poker was invented to the time poker will cease to exist. Since no one will ever be able to figure out what the long run will be you can't say that people are winners "over the long run" because they aren't. It's absolutely impossible to be a winner over the long run because nobody will play "over the long run". Maybe that makes sense or maybe I need to smoke some kush. [/ QUOTE ] You can know if someone is a long term winner before actually seeing them reach the long term. [/ QUOTE ] How? [/ QUOTE ] Are you serious??? If they play well or not... [/ QUOTE ] But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner. [/ QUOTE ] you have to be leveling. you cant possibly be this stupid [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#4
11-15-2007, 05:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
im quitting too, really hate the poker lifestyle .. also ansky i disagree, just cuz someone plays well doesnt mean they are/will be a longterm winner... so many 'good' players go busto and some of them never come back ...
|
|
#5
11-15-2007, 05:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner [/ QUOTE ] This could be the DUMBEST post I have ever read [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
|
#6
11-15-2007, 05:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner [/ QUOTE ] This could be one of DUMBEST posts I have ever read [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why that is stupid. Stephen you were just mad earlier in the thread about unneeded flaming, so why would you then talk [censored] to me. Quit being a hypocrite.
|
|
#7
11-15-2007, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner [/ QUOTE ] This could be one of DUMBEST posts I have ever read [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why that is stupid. Stephen you were just mad earlier in the thread about unneeded flaming, so why would you then talk [censored] to me. Quit being a hypocrite. [/ QUOTE ] I am not talking chit to you,nor mad at you.I also am not the only one who has questioned this post....so I will ask you nicely then if you were offended. I really have know idea what point you are trying to get accross in this post with regard to SS quitting poker?
|
|
#8
11-15-2007, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner [/ QUOTE ] This could be one of DUMBEST posts I have ever read [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why that is stupid. Stephen you were just mad earlier in the thread about unneeded flaming, so why would you then talk [censored] to me. Quit being a hypocrite. [/ QUOTE ] I am not talking chit to you,nor mad at you.I also am not the only one who has questioned this post....so I will ask you nicely then if you were offended. I really have know idea what point you are trying to get accross in this post with regard to SS quitting poker? [/ QUOTE ] The topic got started when somebody had mentioned the long run, and that got me thinking as to what exactly the long run is, and if someone could actually win over the long run. I just want someone to explain to me how someone can be a winner in the long run if nobody is alive long enough to see the long run?
|
|
#9
11-15-2007, 07:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
mike caro said that you can take the best tournament player and someone ranked at 150, put them on the same table of a tournament everyday and the difference between the two would take maybe 2 years to show up in the results.
i am not player hating on anyone and i never will. my beef with shannon is that he wants to call something that spoiled him early.......a stupid game.........and then when things get a little tough, he wants to quit. now he says he has more money than he knows what to do with? gee, life is sweet, eh shannon? i really wish i knew what that feeling is like. when my poker playing doesnt go well, my over all financial situation follows suit. and now i got to hear it from some spoiled whiner who in my eyes, has a great life and nothing to complain about. a good portion of any of his failures in this game are his own undoing too. shannon, i am striving to get to where you are at. i was on my way once and then stumbled HARD. i know about loss. my life has been a living hell because of this game.......but i am not going to quit.......EVER. please dont call this game stupid. you have no right in my eyes. its like a slap in my face. you dont know what its like to really suffer. you guys who sympathize with shannon are a bunch of saps and you probably have no clue to the self accountability and burdens of "having to win".
|
|
#10
11-15-2007, 08:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Shannon Shorr thinking of quitting ...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] But if they are not around for the long term (which is the lifetime of poker, not the player) how can you know if they would be a long term winner. Also, in order to be a long term winner you would need to consider every hand of poker that has ever been played which is in the trillions (probably more but I'm not sure what comes after trillions). What hands a player plays in their lifetime is still only a short term sample and therefore you can't say that someone is a long term winner [/ QUOTE ] This could be one of DUMBEST posts I have ever read [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why that is stupid. [/ QUOTE ] it is because quadrillions comes after trillions. Everythign else about your post was spot on.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
