3 ms·

Are the "winning players" that you refer to at every level, or do you just count those at the very top as winners? Is poker zero-sum, or do things like spectat

by Jabbles 14y ago

Are the "winning players" that you refer to at every level, or do you just count those at the very top as winners? Is poker zero-sum, or do things like spectator events or sponsorship change that? Also, can you comment on the "creativity" aspect that the blog post suggests. I would have thought very little strategy or tactics are thought up on the spot, but take many weeks of practice beforehand. Perhaps that is only at the top levels though?

cynicalkane 14y ago
Winning players: The winning players he's talking about exist at every level. At the small time level, they're often "prop" players, sponsored by the casino to generate action where the floor manager wants it. Poker is strongly negative-sum. The venue has to be paid for. There isn't enough sponsorship to go around to everyone, and there definitely isn't any for the small time. Creativity: spending a lot of time practicing something isn't the opposite of creativity. I find that creativity is simply recombining things you already know how to do. There aren't many fields where someone is simply "a natural" at a very high level; it almost always comes from practice.
andyakb 14y ago
As far as zero-sum goes, with the rake [the fee per pot casinos charge] it is negative sum. Further, when ESPN pays Caesars to broadcast the World Series of Poker, none of that money is added to the prize pool, so it is not like professional golf where sponsors help add to the prizepool [or maybe entirely add to it, im not sure]. Some individual players are sponsored so for them, they are "freerolling" [meaning they cant lose money, they can only win as somebody else is paying their way]. For your creativity question, it depends a lot on how players think. There are a lot of small situations that occur in a game where what I have been studying previously makes me think of a better play while I am actually playing, but most of that is based on concepts I have been previously discussing and thinking about. However, Phil Galfond, one of the top players in the world, has said that he learns the most by playing and thinking deeply about every situation and figuring things out on the fly. He is clearly an exception to the rule, and I he is where he is at now because of all the hours he played leading to now as well as how much he discussed the game with other very high level players.

by Jabbles 14y ago

cynicalkane 14y ago

Winning players: The winning players he's talking about exist at every level. At the small time level, they're often "prop" players, sponsored by the casino to generate action where the floor manager wants it. Poker is strongly negative-sum. The venue has to be paid for. There isn't enough sponsorship to go around to everyone, and there definitely isn't any for the small time. Creativity: spending a lot of time practicing something isn't the opposite of creativity. I find that creativity is simply recombining things you already know how to do. There aren't many fields where someone is simply "a natural" at a very high level; it almost always comes from practice.

andyakb 14y ago

As far as zero-sum goes, with the rake [the fee per pot casinos charge] it is negative sum. Further, when ESPN pays Caesars to broadcast the World Series of Poker, none of that money is added to the prize pool, so it is not like professional golf where sponsors help add to the prizepool [or maybe entirely add to it, im not sure]. Some individual players are sponsored so for them, they are "freerolling" [meaning they cant lose money, they can only win as somebody else is paying their way]. For your creativity question, it depends a lot on how players think. There are a lot of small situations that occur in a game where what I have been studying previously makes me think of a better play while I am actually playing, but most of that is based on concepts I have been previously discussing and thinking about. However, Phil Galfond, one of the top players in the world, has said that he learns the most by playing and thinking deeply about every situation and figuring things out on the fly. He is clearly an exception to the rule, and I he is where he is at now because of all the hours he played leading to now as well as how much he discussed the game with other very high level players.