Subj: Fwd: GCA "Requim to a new Pro Player"
Date: 5/27/2003 12:22:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: MEEHAN1952
To: Newgca
-----------------
Forwarded Message:
Subj: Re: GCA "Requim to a new Pro Player"
Date: 5/27/2003 12:13:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: meehan1952@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
meehan1952@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
from the Internet (Details)
>Subject: GCA "Requim to a new Pro Player"
>From: newgca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Newgca)
>Date: 5/27/2003 1:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time
.........
>
>The true professional poker player at this time can be compared to a
cowboy
>at
>the beginning of the last century.
rgp & Russ,
Holy Mother of God! Altho I will undoubtedly yet *again* get reamed
out on
rgp, I simply cannot resist <grin or wistful sigh, I remain
undecided>. Russ,
you must have just watched that movie with Tom Selleck about "the last
cowboy",
right?
For those pollyanish naive eyes-closed donkeys ("So many fishes, so
little
time") who self-perceive that they are playing *POKER*, when in fact
the game
is nine levels above them, and their denial-induced aspirations of
playing the
game well and successfully will crash on the rocks of the stone
cheats, I hate
to inform you, but .... if you seriously think you're getting a square
break at
any game 80-160 limit or 25-50 blind pot-limit, or bigger, you are
hopelessly
naive and doomed to defeat. The trick is, *accept* the *fact* you're
getting
cheated, and figure out *how*, and then figure out how to earn a
living against
the criminals.
Trust me. Been there, done that.
So, while anyone who agrees with Russ (even *very* specifically,
narrowly
(redundant, for emphasis, *get* it ? ) and who does *NOT* attach
himself in any
way, shape or form to his general outlook - gets reamed out, I am
willing to
take the heat .. altho, please, e-mail me *AND* post cuz otherwise I
may not
see your response.
I go back to my post - I'm too lazy to learn google-search, a word I
picked up
here - hey, you take you're computer, and I'll rely on my memory, and
you lay
me eleven-to-ten, an' I'll bust you <grin> ) - circa January 2000 -
about
requiring at *registration* swaps, pieces, deals, yadayada, - and some
obviously *brilliant* guy from the Bay area respectfully and politely
disagreed, and we had a brief rgp discussion, during which he
convinced me that
I was going overboard: ok, ok, perhaps five per cent is not
outcome-determinative, but/and .... *ALL* of it??? I think the public
is
entitled to *KNOW*.
The lawyer's ethical code sets forth: (paraphrasing, perhaps)
"avoidance of the
*appearance* of impropriety".
Now, hypothetically, you're down to the last three in a major event,
first
place pays four hundred thousand, second is two, third is one, and
your two
remaining opponents - neither of whom has five cents of their own
money, owes
everyone in the world, cannot pay next months' electric bill, they
*already*
disconnected the phone for non-payment - have been put into the event
by the
same backer - they can't afford it, right? - and have *already* been
caught on
videotape shaking hands *under the table* - and who *NEVER ONCE* raise
each
other, cuz if they do, their backer might not put them into the next
tourney,
as a result of which unless they find some *other* sucker, they go on
welfare,
and the County has to pay the burial costs -
now, assuming that they are *COMPLETELY* honest, and try to play hard
against
each other, and not whack you up <hee-hee> ... does it occur to you,
perhaps,
that maybe - just *maybe* - their unconscious actions might be
influenced by
the economic reality that if they act in a certain way, they're on
welfare???
tomoro ??
Gee, hope I do not ring cynical <gasp>.
Hey, I'm all for risk-avoidance, five per cent is too low, I'll leave
it to the
math and poker guys - I'm just an anonymous nit, I know virtually
*nothing* -
to figure out the details .....but/and I go back to my original
suggestion, for
over *FOUR YEARS*, that partners, teams, gangs and criminals be
required to
state, in writing, at the time of registration, their economic
agreements.
And, if they refuse to accurately do so, *THROW THEM OUT* .
So simple. Yet no one wants to do it, cuz the gangs would be
eliminated, and
fifteen per cent of "pro" tourney circuit players who cannot afford
their
electric bill would be eliminated ... and, lo and behold, tourney
entries would
increase two hundred per cent within six months becuz the *honest*
guys, the
guys who can actually *afford* to play, would enter becuz it's
entertainment,
it's competition, it's social, and they *DO NOT* feel like suckers who
are
getting whacked up, would choose to enter for fun and/or profit.
I mean, if Tiger Wods and I play golf one hundred times, and he gives
me zero
strokes, he *will* beat me *ALL* one hundred times - luck aside, I got
no
chance <sigh> - but it would be *FAIR* - he's not kicking his ball in
the woods
for a better lie - and he will beat me cuz he's *better*, and I feel
honored to
have *tried*, but lost.
You wanna make poker a big-time s****t, a competition? Get *RID* of
the
cheats... *NOW !!
And, back to Russ' original theme: for the young guys - yeah, he's
*RIGHT* - go
to college, learn computers, get a job. I been e-mailing wannabes the
same
thing for years (and they are, almost universally, offended, but at
least I
sleep well at nite, telling the truth). You seriously want this life
of
depravity and degredation, begging for a buy-in cuz you're a pathetic
bust-out?
It's a great *S****T* - but/and, unless you are gifted by God with
loose yet
precise wrist action, excellent hand-to-eye coordination, forearm
strength,
great balance, physical endurance including heat tolerance, and you're
a
lifetime seventeen handicapper, you *ain't gonna* make a living
playing golf on
the pro tour. And you *ain't gonna make a living playing poker. So,
enjoy the
s****t, and expect to pay for it from your college-degree-acquired
job.
BTW, I am self-financed.
And, generally speaking, the biggest tippers are the biggest cheats -
golly gee
whiz, I can't imagine why. <gasp>
Ok, math guys, let's figure it out: the top payoffs are top-end-
loaded,
forty-twenty-ten, a criminal buys in for *SIX TIMES* the entry fee,
but gets
*SIX TIMES* the number of chips - now, what are *his* chances, versus
yours, an
honorable nit who gets the normal amount of chips - of fini****ng in
the top
three ? huh ....
Respectfully submitted,
Anonymous Jim
swimming up-stream against the greedy, lazy and unethical
(avarice, sloth and ? ... the seven deadly sins)
previous post verbatim:
>Subject: GCA "Requim to a new Pro Player"
>From: newgca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Newgca)
>Date: 5/27/2003 1:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20030527044823.01752.00000636@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>Requiem to a new Pro Player
>
>To the young people entering the early years of life, let me give you
some of
>the soundest advice on being a professional poker player you could ever
>receive.
>
>The true professional poker player at this time can be compared to a
cowboy
>at
>the beginning of the last century. The time has passed and what is
presented
>to
>you in neon lights and dazzling glory, is just an invitation to a
ruination
>of
>ones life.
>
>I started out in the mid sixties, when there was no pinnacle you couldn't
>achieve playing poker. Professional poker players of the top caliber
easily
>made far more than the top athletes and other professions. As time moved
on
>and
>economics and inflation raised wages for everyone, the same was not true
for
>poker.
>
>Making six figure incomes was an easy thing to do in those days, when
money
>went much further than most remember. Entering poker in those days, the
sky
>was
>the limit if you were good and had discipline. Just being good was
enough,
>for
>you would never have thought the day would come when all the casinos
would
>enter the world we live in.
>
>Young people starting to think of playing poker for a living had better
think
>twice. This is an occupation that doesn't have much of a future in
today's
>age.
>I keep reading where many of you young players are entering this arena to
try
>to become professional players. This is definitely a wrong choice. Thirty
>years
>ago there wasn't a ceiling or cap on where you could advance by being
>skilled,
>however those days are far past.
>
>I read where young people are happy making $25,000 a year and this is
really
>disturbing. To limit your life and happiness to an occupation such as
this
>for
>such meager amounts. Isn't your life and happiness worth far more than
>$25,000
>a year? Don't many of you have any ambition?
>
>When gambling became legalized in this country over the last decade,
taxation
>and the rake has all but ruined poker. It is but a side show now,
enticing
>new
>players with illusions of hitting it big. In reality, it far easier to
become
>an NBA players and make a bundle of money. Easier to become a movie star
than
>a
>successful professional poker player. Besides the money is so much
greater
>and
>the stress so much less.
>
>Realize because you win today, doesn't mean you are going to win in ten
>years.
>The game keeps changing and the casinos keep taking more out of the pots
as
>their expenses rise. Thirty years ago an entry level bankroll could be
less
>than $500 to ensure you success, today $20,000 doesn't mean a thing.
Entry
>level into poker today, to make any kind of money, means starting at the
>$20-$40 level and even here your income has a cap.
>
>When poker keeps shouting out for cor****ate sponsor****p, the media makes
>stars
>out of those they deem camera worthy, those that will entice the younger
>generation into a deceitful business.
>
>The bundles of $100 bills and the glamour of being in the magazines
doesn't
>mean very much unless you are the one receiving it. The ones receiving
the
>money in today's age are those is the business, as opposed to the
players.
>
>Young people shouldn't let the glamor and glitz of a prolonged propaganda
>soaked media blitz ruin their lives. The promotion of poker today is
>equivalent
>to the cigarette promotions of the thirties and forties,
>
>Many will try and less than a handful will succeed. Education is your
ticket
>in
>today's world. Computer literacy is a must. Those with any ambition to
>succeed
>in life, let me warn you in advance, poker is not a field to enter,
except
>from
>the operational side.
>
>Don't mistake seeing these people on TV and magazines with financial
success
>from playing poker. The casinos need the media to promote the industry
and
>who
>wants to see the old guys. If this was the sixties or the seventies, I
would
>heartily endorse becoming a professional poker player, however it isn't.
>
>Young people, heed my words, get an education and become computer
literate
>for
>that is the world of today. It's very disturbing to see people being
seduced
>by
>the lights and the dazzle of the $100 bills. This is an illusion, not
>available
>to but a handful, who really don't need any skill. All it takes is the
pull
>of
>a card at the op****tune time and wham you're a millionaire. The lottery
>offers
>you the same chance.
>
>The fixation of a game called limit Texas Holdem is ridiculous. No top
>professional of today would choose this game to play if they had the
choice.
>This game has a greater luck variant and smaller skill variant than
almost
>any
>poker game played, yet it is the fastest growing. The reason is it is a
fix
>and
>anyone can learn it's fundamentals. The problem is, once you master this
game
>and want to advance to a higher level, you will find that level occupied
by
>many like yourself.
>
>Limit Holdem is to simplistic a game to play. The game is promoted since
it
>is
>fast, easy to teach and is the highest earner for the drop of any casino
>poker
>game. The skill factor is by far the smallest and all the books and
charts
>and
>hand groupings aren't going to help you if you can't learn to bet and
read
>people properly.
>
>There are no books out to teach you how to become a top professional.
Most of
>today's top players didn't read any poker books to become what they are,
as
>they didn't have any poker books when they learned to play.
>
>Trust me on this, poker will evolve and a new game will be brought into
play
>as
>soon as you master the other. This is the way of the game. People today
want
>action, while poker is not about action, it is about winning. Poker is
like
>chess, a war game, a war game with a substantial amount of luck to enable
>those
>to think they have a chance to win.
>
>I read posts where it's stated poker isn't gambling. Poker is always
>gambling,
>but with an edge. Limit Holdem nullifies the edge and leaves you with as
>little
>as possible. You people want action, but isn't the money what
professional
>poker is all about.
>
>All stud games, all pot limit games, all draw poker games give you a far
>greater advantage over the weaker opponent than limit Holdem, yet it is
the
>game that is marketed. Please explain this to me in a way other than to
make
>the marketers more money, in the selling of books, charts and rake.
>
>I dare a top professional to state his favorite game is limit Holdem.
>
>Russ Georgiev
>
|
