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

[Boise123]

I for one enjoyed the article. Thanks

[cbloom]

Decent article. I like the idea of kids in the future being groomed for poker the way they are for tennis now, or like Tiger was for golf. There really is no "Tiger Woods of poker" right now because nobody was raised from birth and coached their whole life with the goal of beating poker.

I think people underestimate how important technical play is and overvalue the impressive unorthodox plays someone like Kenny makes. Kenny might play the river amazingly well, might be able to make great reads, etc. etc. but if he makes big technical errors he is easy to beat. There are already a lot of people like BT who play very very good technical hold'em, and they will only get better, and so many people just don't understand that balanced/randomized technical play is not exploitable, while on the other hand technical errors against a near-game-theory opponent will definitely lead to long term money loss.

[JokersAttack]

Nice article.

[What?]

There will never be a Woods or Federer of poker because the variance plays such a roll. If anything the evolution of the game will make it harder for someone to dominate.

If Tran feels he and others are better players it seems they could adapt to the internet games.

[NNNNOOOOONAN]

Brandon is down online?

[jeff329]

[ QUOTE ]
Brandon is down online?

[/ QUOTE ] He is down huge online...at least at 50/100 and up...and i know HSDB is not 100% accurate, but rarely does it show a 1.2 mil dog who is actually a winner..

[stevieb]

so how long do you guys think it will be till something opens up for the poker world similar to the Bollettieri Tennis Academy where parents send their kids off to become poker prodigies?

[SlowHabit]

Brandon,

I'm dying of some Kenny Tran sickness. Please provide some hand histories where on the river, Tran does something that shows he's the second coming of Genius28.

PS. Broke was an enjoyable read.

[king_of_drafts]

[ QUOTE ]

PS. Broke was an enjoyable read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good to know I'm not the only one who ordered and read that. I'll say it was certainly better than the pretentious garbage that was Positively Fifth Street.

[Micturition Man]

[ QUOTE ]
There will never be a Woods or Federer of poker because the variance plays such a roll.


[/ QUOTE ]


I agree with this.

These discussions of who is the greatest and who is the best always make me uncomfortable, because the variance in poker makes it almost impossible to judge a player unless you are an expert yourself in the relevant game, AND you have extensive playing experience with the person in question.

Add to that the fact that there are many different niches within poker (tourneys, cash games, limit, NL, etc.) and the fact that people have different motivations and risk tolerances, and I feel like these discussions are kind of futile, at least among outside observers.

Much love for BA though. This was way more original and intelligent than 99% of what is written about the poker world.