Letters to the Editor
-
Um. Yes. And?
Short summary of article: "I am old. Things were better when I was young."
Seriously. It is a GAMBLING tournament for MILLIONS of dollars and this guy is surprised that people are greedy and use strategy? Whatever.
-
I really liked this piece.
Poker is something that bored me beyond description in my limited experience with it, and while the idea that things change is of course blasé, this article looked at it in an engaging and interesting fashion in my opinion (and a reminded me as I sometimes need that not all traditional ways are bad).
-
As a player
of poker, tournament and ring, I must beg to differ.
First, in the age we live in, it is refreshing to see a large number of people embrace the rationality and systematic thought that poker demands.
Would that we had considered our national policies so carefully.
Secondly, having played a number of clubs as well as online, let me just say that poker clubs...with all due respect...suck. Are we cloistered online? Perhaps. But we can also cook a healthy meal, change our clothes, hop out of the game for half an hour or so to engage with our spouses, children, pets, etc.
When you play poker in a club, that's ALL you do.
So, poker isn't the game it was when unsavory, life-destroying fuckups like Stu Ungar (who died, penniless, at a young age having blown all his winnings at the track and on coke) dominated the scene. So what?
Now it's all clean, smart, professional people. How horrible. Oh, please bring back the cokeheads and degenerate, mobbed up gamblers of old!
Feh. Poker is a great game, it always will be. Evolution is good for the soul.
-
The author loses all credibility
In saying that Stu Ungar was "perhaps one of the best poker players in history," the author simply loses his audience's trust. You can say Stu Ungar was "perhaps the best poker player in history" (he won the Main Event three times). You can say he was "one of the best poker players in history", which is essentially inarguable. But if you hedge your best by saying he was "perhaps one of the best poker players in history," you're basically showing your ignorance of the meaning of the words you employ. It would be like saying "some have said Babe Ruth was one of the best baseball players ever." Golly, who are these pundits? "Abraham Lincoln is considered by some to be among our best presidents."
Buy a spine before you write again.
-
Stop tapping on the glass, please.
Part of the beauty of poker is that the rank amateurs will still beat the students of the game often enough that they will keep coming back to be fleeced over and over again. The students of the game have gotten better. Unfortunately, most haven't gotten so good that they can selectively fleece or skin, at will. Sounds like you got skinned one time too many.
-
This was absolutely terrible
There are so many logical errors and false assertions here that I don't know where to start. I don't think I'll bother. Sadly this piece is almost unrelated to actual poker in any form.
All the WSOP shows is that when you have a field of 90%+ amateurs an amateur is likely to win. That's it. There is no greater meaning.
Talk of a well-defined mathematical strategy is just foolishness. The whole article is just plain awful and nothing more than a technophobic "back in my day" extravaganza.
-
Poker as life
I beg to disagree with Robert Burton on his take on poker. I like the article and sympathize with his view. The fact is poker is a game involving chance and skill. The winners may be amateurs with limited playing history, but still are mathematically skilled and psychologically superior as demonstrated by last few winners. They need to be versatile with game theory and knowledgeable of human psychology. While his critique of those playing with other people's money is valid up to a certain point it's still the result that counts. If you keep losing other people's money soon you will not have backers anymore, and the fact the winners are not the old reliable (professional gamblers using other people's money) argues against his thesis. His nostalgia for a bygone romantic or Hollywood scenario was always a myth. His disdain for the geeks that dominates the winning circles like Mr. Yang somewhat reminds me of the distaste or sour grape for the rise of China and other Asia countries or even in Silicon Valley.
-
Poker is D-E-A-D
The LW's below are the exact Fishes Mr. Burton was talking about (or they sound like the online poker avatars anyway).
I digress.
I'll give an example so other Fishes can comprehend what the article was saying:
Photography used to be an art form. Photographers adjusted light and film manually and manipulated chemicals and paper to develop the negatives. Now, we have digital photography, and Photoshop, and everyone's taking pictures without much clue how the process is done and passing it off as photography. Not only that, these Fishes wouldn't know the aesthetic difference between film and digital; just go shooting away with abandon.
Like these all-ins I see twenty times every three hours, LIVE at poker casinos. The art of the bet, and the read, and the maneuver are gone thanks to accessible technology.
Hey, there's nothing we can do about it. Ce La Vie.
Mr. Burton didn't touch on some aspects though, like poker books which are so ubiquitous now. Back then, Doylee's Super System sold at $200 a pop with lots of angry players denouncing its publication. Go to Borders now and see how many books expand on Super System's playbook. Go to a casino and you'll see the same books on the shelf. Even gambling addicts have read at least one.
There's also the House take which seems to be going up and up, squeezing the Texas Hold'em players until they're forced to play crazy to make back their money. Las Vegas isn't so bad, but the L.A. ones are pure robbery. A limit of $200 buy in and playing $5 per chip with $8 blinds are not conducive to practicing the "patience" aspect of the game. Make one bad bet, or lose one big hand, and you've got to make it back quick or else it's back to the Walk of Shame (or worse, the car valet) for you!
It's simply not the same game anymore.
The true poker tournament to watch in the future are the HORSE tournaments. Professionals only.