poker essays vol 1- some parts outdated?

[jordiepop]

I was reading the chapter on limit vs no limit and mason talks about the fact that good players have too much of an edge when playing nl, and there fore the games will die out. If anything just the opp has happened, and these games are growing by the numbers. Has mason revised his thoughts on this issue. Does anyone else have any opinions on the idea that nl games will dry up because players will get tired of losing money?? Also have you gfuys found any of his other ideas to be false or shaky.

[Grumbo]

I haven't read the book, but I know it was published before poker was broadcast on TV with any regularity. I think NL has become the norm as that's what's on TV and people want to emulate those they are watching. If Limit were broadcast instead of NL then most people would likely be playing Limit poker right now. I don't think the authors (or anyone for that matter) realized how televised poker would change everything. At a minimum, it brought more players into the fold (myself included).

[WaterMan4]

Also, I think the fact that a lot of No-Limit Hold'em games now have a cap on the buy-in has increased the popularity. And the invention of internet poker where players can play No-Limit Hold’em for very low stakes has helped. But I think the original premise that good players have a larger edge over bad players in No-Limit Hold’em vs. Limit Hold’em is still true.

[ptmusic]

I'm pretty sure Mason got it right. The games did indeed dry up years ago precisely because the sharks took all the fish's money. But then the poker boom happened and it is indeed a different environment today. I believe Mason discussed this very topic in the 2+2 magazine a while back. So in a sense, Mason got it right AND that section is outdated (unless, of course, history repeats itself....).

[QuickLearner]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think the fact that a lot of No-Limit Hold'em games now have a cap on the buy-in has increased the popularity. And the invention of internet poker where players can play No-Limit Hold’em for very low stakes has helped. But I think the original premise that good players have a larger edge over bad players in No-Limit Hold’em vs. Limit Hold’em is still true.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup. I think the capped buy-in is an indirect factor in the resurgence. MM's original point was correct, and still is, but the cap allows weak players to last longer against the strong ones. Hopefully, long enough to fall in love with the game.

And I feel that micro stakes help in the same way.

[steamboatin]

I can't remember where but Mason discussed this in length. This was written pre-poker boom and pre-capped buy in so it is outdated for the moment but I have a feeling the fish are just going broke at a slower pace and Mason will be right again in a few years.

Although the ultimate fish continue to play slots so I may be completely wrong.