blonde poker forum

It is a blog by a long time pal, Brad Willis, about some of our responsibilities in poker.

It is excellent in my personal opinion.


http://psta.rs/13H4onM

That sir is a cracking read - on so many levels, so muc sense talked. Without being controversial, I did think of our PHA board a little bit - sometimes not all the time, and in teg same way there are many who make everyone feel a contribtuiton is valid and seek to understand and others who are link "standard, donk" - end thread.

Good read.

He listed the mercenary way some pros talk openly about belittling the recreational opponent, but one question I have is, is there a way to quantify the demonstrative effect? From poor etiquette alone can we fathom a guess at how many rec players are feeling unwelcomed? Are we getting many long term rec players complaining that the game is becoming less fun?

Is it the drops in amateurs year after year in the same types of tourns? Is this occurring?

Wondering if it is a overhype from pro players to bash other players who talk strategy at the table, as another example, in fear that the fish will learn when really they may appreciate the insight and play creatively anyway.

I am not sure the nature of this beast is turning away players, but do think it is foolish to be anything but hugely polite and considerate at the table and where possible, further conversation when its there.

Is this a genuine problem to the future ratio of rec players vs pros?

Hmm.

Great article, and what a coincidence that George Danzer is the subject of the video at the end Tikay!

Dmitri Nobles was on the table next to me for all of day 2 I think it was, and it was like a circus as he span up a pretty huge stack throughout the day. Was pretty funny to watch and he definitely loved the game :)

Thank you for linking this article Tikay enjoyed reading it.

It's a very good article, but I have found it quite interesting how a lot of the twitter discourse around it seems to frame the issue in a needlessly didactic way, making it about essentially young vs old, suggesting that older professional players 'get it' and create a good atmosphere for recreational players while younger people do not, when clearly the reality is going to be far more nuanced than that. I think these kinds of sweeping generalisations are often problematic because they force people to take 'sides' (in this case based on age) rather than properly engage with the substantive point.

Additionally I think there is a slight nostalgia for a time that never really existed, poker has always seemed to me to be very insular and intimadating to new players (although you could argue the 5/6 years I have been involved isn't a long enough time to accurately judge), there is always going to be a slight us vs them mentality amongst some people.

Great read. Even though he states otherwise, there is still an undercurrent that it's the young inteweb kids that are the problem here.

But having said that, this should be mandatory reading for just about every serious player.

Lovely read.

One thing that is missed out though is how the internet kids were treated when they first went on the live scene.  Then it was the other way around, long time live pros sneered, laughed and generally made them as frosty a reception as possible.  I completely agree that the internet kid side of the equation has over compensated by their reaction and some just have the arrogance to ignore the fact a recreational player generally wants to have a fun and happy live experience, while not respecting the sums involved in the game or the other people at the table.  However it's not solely the fault of the internet generation, sections of the old live guard have a certain responsibility as well.

I need to read more stuff life that. It was compelling and also struck a chord with me. My 'before the bubble' moment (one of many if truth be told), was in a big on line tournament where I went out two spots from the cash. I knew, and understood why, nobody really cared. To me though, it hurt bad. I had satted in for only 50p, and a min cash was something like £300+. I watched the rest of the game play out, and knew that everyone left in that lobby would not give two hoots about my sighaments. Poker is like that sometimes  to most, if not all. of us.

Im not sure why everyone is raving about this piece. Ok, he has a fair point, but its from a single point of view. There are lots of things about the article which are so one sided it becomes a poor read.

There is no mention of aspiration. Some people that are playing their first event WANT to play against the best, (including some of the young kids), and will see the way that they act as fun (assuming its not obnoxious). We cant assume that everyone is 50 years old (id suggest the biggest demographic is now sub 30).

He makes a big thing about it being his first WSOP event and a big $1500 buy in. Does this mean that he has never played his local $50 buy in roffling around with his mates, having a few beers, perhaps throwing in his chips because his mates have bust and are moving on to a bar? Would he be self critical at that point? On mans $1500 is another mans $100,000 is another mans $50. Don't make people act to your own expectations.

Im pretty sure that the "kids" roffling around on day 1 are going to have a whole other attitude to the game when they final. Maybe the man who shared a table with him, and was put off initially, can then watch him ship a bracelet and might even change his opinion  when the kid has his game face on and crushes?

We cant all be 40 year old men. These kids are having fun, let them have fun. Providing they aren't being abusive to players (which isn't the angle of the article), then don't direct their actions. I would sooner play with a lively 20 something than a generic 40 year old business man, or even many of the "old school pros". First the kids get told they need personalities to "promote the game " on TV, then they get told to settle down, you are scaring off the punters.

The article has a merit, but as for raving on about it, im sorry I don't buy it. Its one persons view, and yes maybe some people can take some pointers, but then so can some of the punters too.

It reminds of the thread recently where people where lauding the "loud and verbose" old guy. Well yes those guys are fun at the table, right up until they crush your dreams and give you a rub down. Look how polarising Laurence Gosney is. People who have only been on the receiving end of his table persona don't like him, anyone who has spent time with him will tell you he is a great guy.

The article should be don't judge guys for what they do at the table, judge them for how they are away from it

"My point is simply this: if you want an insular world in which only the best play against the best, then, by all means, do your best to make the new money feel unwelcome. Make sure they know they aren't part of your clique. Make sure they know you would prefer to play against people who make perfect plays. And, then, eventually, make sure you cripple your your expectations for your earning potential, because there is only so much money you can win inside your circle of friends.

Today, I'm just some guy who hasn't played a lot by modern standards. But, I've played enough to know that winning involves a lot more than playing against your friends and the fish you know. Sometimes you need to thank the guys who bust before the bubble."



This is great advice. It basically says you should make an effort to be pleasant toward your fellow players, especially those less fortunate or capable than yourself.

It says that you should respect them, make time for them, make them feel like they belong, and it gives sound financial reasons for doing so.


Well I think those lessons apply equally well to everyday life.

Be nice to people, respect them and if you can, do something to make their life better, even if it's only with a smile and a kind word.

There is no financial incentive, but I promise you hand on heart, the rewards are worth more than money.

There's a joke among bloggers that the people you see sitting down half an hour before a tournament begins are the people who are the least likely to win an event.

This interested me.

I detest being late for a tournament. In fact, I detest being there on time.

I like being one of the first people to a table. I can scope the landscape, introduce myself to the dealer and begin to compile my profiles of the players as they arrive, one by one.

It's as much a people game as it is a card game. Certainly to me, anyway. It's fun. I like to get a table chatting, relaxed, comfortable. Yes, this makes it harder to bluff (lie) convincingly but, so much more importantly, if I'm going to spend seven, eight, twelve hours in a chair, I'm jolly well going to make sure I enjoy it.

Proper fish, me.

he makes a valid point, but as fizix points out 'the older generation' who live to angle and berate are hardly good for the game either!

let's have some semblance of balance.

That is so close to my line it is scary.

I doubt, ever since I began playing poker, that I've ever sat at a poker table & failed to say "hi" to everyone. for all the reasons you mention. Let's enjoy ourselves, we are all recreationals. I doubt 3 in 10 reply. Not because they dislike me, which would be fair enough - most don't know me, & that is especially so in Vegas - but because it would seem that the notion of someone saying "afternoon guys" at a poker table is like something from a different universe.  I actually think it makes some of them unconfortable, oddly enough. Who is that weirdo who wants to say hello?

Newbies, not so much, it helps them feel comfy, & to them, unused to the ways of poker, they actually think it is quite normal to say "hi".

Can you imagine a world where we sit down to share a table, & a game, for up to 12 hours, & we cba to even say "hi" to each other?

This is not a "new school" thing by the way, it has always been that way, young & old alike.

I have no prob if they don't want to chat, fine by me. But to not exchange civil greetings?

It may be me that is weird, but I find that astonishing.

Really feel like doing an opposite of the op after my recent trip to Newcastle, will do it in my blog tomorrow.

This is all from a 'old recreational' player pov rater than a 'young recreational' player.

I'm the Tikay. 'm happy to talk to others all day long, pretty boring day at the pokers otherwise, but a lot of players aren't like that, and that's fine too. My experience of vegas is different though. I only play low stakes but find the people much more friendly in vegas. That may be that I like a lot of US sports & TV so have something relative to discuss.

The first bigish live tourny I played in England had 2 very well known players, who are universally liked, who spent much of the tourney calling all us recs fish every time they lost a hand and berating players in general. They sure lasted till the dinner break though!!!

With Tikay and Tal on the front that I love to converse at the table as you are spending a long time there and you want to get value for money but there are often factors that make it a less sociable occasion.

One could be you have a guy that doesn't stop talking or the nature or the way in which he says something makes you very agitated. Could be that he is abrasive and loud and killing any other decent convo.

Also poker players may also be argued as generally, maybe not being the most sociable bunch just because we are choosing to sit around at a table for hours on end. Many playing it, especially from the younger circles are probably shy introverts which within their nervousness, means they are less sociable and the table is a little more cold. Not to say they are disrespectful but just shy. On that, I am straying away from the point.

Would agree with fizix that the nostalgia tones to this irked me a little as if to say that someone would find it harder to go through the same journey he did today but it is more a piece of him pining for the good old days when he may have been a better player or had a better chance of taking a shot, but now his living is reporting on other poker players triumphs, which must be just a little bit frustrating. I thought this was him just unfairly venting on players when it is more a piece about how he's annoyed he was unlucky in that 1500 some years ago and over valuing the settings then because they were a better time personally for him.

I don't get why someone wanting to bust a tournament is a bad thing? I feel like if I posted this talking about the time I saw XYZ play angry birds on his iPad, have that run out of battery, only to swap to his iPhone to play! I was in my biggest live tourney ever at that point and people would call me an idiot for saying it was disrespectful. They would say it is lucky to have someone who doesn't care on their table. I guess one is pro and one is rec but it still doesn't make sense to me.

Good message in the piece, something HoneyB has discussed a lot.

Bit irrelevant to the subject really but I have definitely come across many more objectionable old school guys than young guys. Some of the young guys appear a bit surly, we were all young once. A lot of the older guys are just intimidating and unpleasant. Pretty lucky I'm so hard really

Agree with nirvana, play with dick lynch, Tom myland and Trevor webber, when they have the hump is pretty intimidating. It's a good job nirvana is a tough guy, I always hang around him in breaks, makes me feel warm and safe.

it's kewl, I'll just flick my hands forward as it to put chips in, you know if you've played live before it's just a thing you do right, to try and find information on whether your opponent is calling etc, it's not an angle it's a 'move'. it's a 'moody'. live players are awful for etiquette, just because they may talk occasionally the regular players are the ones who are the worst.

i'm an unsociable weirdo but still find it very easy to get into lots of interesting chats at the table with a range of different people, all except for the one demographic, the old live grinder who thinks he's a pro yet he just hasn't tracked his results rofl. they just sit there folding getting angry, berating everyone, berating staff, acting awfully and just generally being bad people.

ofc there are bad eggs all round, but in general the online player world just isn't tainted with the live pro tekkers of being awful humans.


try going to the vic.....

I deleted a post that wanted to say and sound exactly like this but a little less street.

streeet brah. that's how alot of people describe me.


IS IT

What's wrong with the old "chip dummy"?

Hardly Ivan Freites, that :)

Sit round a table. Online pros think they know everything. Live pros are convinced they're on home turf so they look scornfully at behooded, beats-clad rangemergers.

There is a balance to be found. It's a game of cards.

Yep, plenty of angleshooters, move-makers and downright thieves. But that's part of the game. Sadly so, perhaps, but part of the game and here to stay.

I don't read the article as intending to separate online v live players or old school v new breed. It's more about how his perceptions of poker have changed. Perception is reality.

Its perception vs romantic notion thou

the reality is that during his clouded rose tinted specs of "ZOMG first WSOP event", he just didn't see the other stuff going on. Now its all second nature, its all he notices

online players play the game, you know the frequencies of our actions. live players think they have this whole next level game where they can be dodgy as fk and it's a strategy. no lol. tossers. there are rules for a reason. the reason there are so many ridic niggly little rules is because of the live tossers over the years trying to bend the rules and gain advantages.

Cutting your chips out is one thing, faffing about etc, but the old stare at your opponent then fake chip toss, done by a live pro against anyone is just an angle. an angle is not acceptable it means your a fking dousche trying to gain an advantage.

was rewatching some hsp for laughs and there is a hand with a young guy vs negreanu (I really should remember more specifics but I cant) and negreanu does it, and the guy is like wtf you try and angle me for bro, and DN is like well you know this is live poker it's all about being a skank (I paraphrased those last few words but he did essentially say this is live deal with it).

everyone has their own ethics, it just so happens that once you've played xyz number of live poker hours you MUST have lost them all.  (incidentally this is why the nice guys [Thew was one till all his outbursts] Nick Hicks, Jakally etc are all so nice and so well liked by so many, it's so unusual to find at the poker table).

I choose not to sink to the live players level, I may well cost myself a marginal bit of ev but w/e I cant be an utter dousche. Nor can I help loudly calling out utter dousches at the table, I take great pleasure in pointing out someones propensity to be an utter skank. if I have to then check up the exact wording of a rule or get a floor ruling away from the table just to prove my point and get a penalty/whole table hating on the person then I will.

brevity ftw

+1

I think there's a lot of common ground between your point and mine.

His perceptions have changed over time because of his exposure to the game.

To put it in more modern terms, the first impression was a sample size of one. By 1,000, he had a much greater sense of recognition and acuity for what was going on at the table.

The article sparks a number of interesting debates (QED I expect) but, as I say, I don't read it as being derogatory to any one group, or even necessarily grouping people artificially.

Alright, Polonius! :D

obv had to look that up, obv am now waving my fist in the air you cheeky sob :p

In that scene, he is telling Hamlet's mother that Hamlet is going mad (given that he's chuntering to no one in particular about philosophy and the point of it all). Seemed like you nailed it tbh :D

ya that's what I do brah.


love a good rant.


I DON'T BELIEVE IT!  is it?

Just don't go spying on me and you'll be fine (didn't end well for Polonius).



Thread title was 'You really oughta read this' and I think that has delivered.

Guy is completely right here. 

As my dreams were crushed in my first main event a few from the bubble, I was greeted by villain shouting ship it, ship it.  Back in 2007 it was.  He must have been late 30s/ early 40s and had $4m or so in cashes.  Classless cockends in every generation, and there always has been. 

The author needs to learn plo8, the atmosphere at the tables is so much better.     


   

I personally don't think this is a 2013 thing.. When I first played live in 2005 I had the exact same experience of mickey taking, that newbs should instantly know everything about live poker and etiquette, that the whole table plays with each other day in day out and who was I to come into their cardroom?

I kept going back but always with the mantra that I was not there to make friends or to impress or conform, I was there to make money and I would try to be as pleasant as I could be if someone was speaking to me much the same as I would in any other walk of life

My first time in Vegas saw me at Caesar's playing a 220 event in 2008. A six foot, broad but ageing man in a cowboy hat, sporting one of those drawstring ties with a cow skull on it watched me play a couple of hands light and declared in a joyously deep southern drawl:

"Ah see we got ourselves one of those 'awn-line' players"

The table laughed. He stared deep into my eyes and I felt like he was tickling the back of my soul. I honestly to this day consider that to be part of my poker education.

I believe it was that comp where I later shook the hand of Steve Danneman...true story...and we're back on topic :)

it's very simple, if you're not a dick you'll be fun to share a poker table with, if you are then you won't.

I agree its cringe but it's not that big of a problem imo, people will always play tournaments and these guys just don't survive in cash games.

IMO, the two area's where this sprt of thing is rife is a) Mid-Stakes tournaments, tourneys like £300 and £500 events in the UK are bad for this, everyone chatting after every hand I"I knew you had a Queen" etc and small stakes cash games, this stuff doesn't go on in high stakes cash games, or at least VERY rarely.

Also I know it's been said already ITT but this is a problem equally spilt across the age groups, not just the young 'uns, the reason the yooungsters get the stick is because nowadays they are so blazen about "maximising EV" talking about bankroll's, profit and stuff openly. Shouldn't do that.

Can't believe you remembered that. Sorry, I just got a little excited.

This entire debate confuses me.

In my experience the UK has a higher than average number of bellends in the population.  Why are we expecting the demographics to change at a poker table?  Anyone behaving with low social skills or just being an outright idiot in the game, will almost certainly have the same problem when conducting the rest of their daily lives.

What's so wrong with talking about those things personally?

Both ages group discuss strategy at the table more than they should; the difference is that the younger generation is generally better at it. In terms of overall decorum, I actually think the younger generation is much, much better than the older.

I really didn't like the artilce at all. He took a long, windy route to his eventual message, which was over almost as soon as it began; his overall message breaks down to 'THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE! WHEN I WAS YOUNGER THEY WERE AMAZING! I HATE MODERNITY!'. As some have pointed out, it's likely simply a case of not looking for certain things at certain times and then going out of his way to find them later. Of course, people should be fun and welcoming and not do any of the retarded things he mentions in his article. But we don't need this article to tell us that.

I had exactly the same spot as the blogger's recent example at the Monte Carlo just gone.  Internet player (very good as well tbf) sat there having a long private but in front of everyone chat with his young  railer mate, both exceptional confident about the young man's chances.  Then he started to advise everyone at the table to play on Lock because the games are soft.  After that I couldn't take him seriously.

I enjoyed the article.

Yes, it is overly nostalgic. Yes, it takes a while to get to the point. Yes, it seems to be incorrectly suggesting that things are much worse now than they were then. Yes, it makes too many generalisations - e.g. that younger (online) players are much worse for the games than older (live) players. But I don't care about these things. Because the overall point that he is making is a very good one.

It does not really matter whether someone is a young internet hotshot, or an old-school live player. There are plenty of players from both groups who are a nause on the games they sit in. There are also plenty from each group who grace the games with their presence. Being old or young is not the important thing (and Titbeam's vitriol against older live players is unfair... they are not all moody angle shooters!). Being a pleasure to play with is all that matters.

The guys who might learn and improve from reading this article are not the scumbags or douches, whether young or old. They will never learn. However, there are a load of players out there who are nice guys but who simply have not quite worked out yet how to behave at the poker table. And this is the sort of article that might make it click for some of them. And the more players it clicks for, the better it is for everyone.

The thing I particularly liked about the article is that it reminded me just how much new players enjoy the game, and just how much of a thrill it is for them the first time they sit down in a tournament or in a cash game. It should always be our aim to enhance the enjoyment of inexperienced players at the table. They are enjoying themselves much more than we are since it is so new and exciting to them. I don't want to burst their bubble in any way - I want to help that bubble last as long as possible. It is wonderful to see inexperienced players truly feeling every pot they play, and riding an incredible rush of excitement during a hand. I am jealous of them in many ways, because I will never get that same rush and joy from poker again. You only get those feelings when you are just starting.

I remember about five years ago I was playing in a cash game and there was an APAT tournament going on in the casino. There were hundreds of players and they were all loving the game so much. You could tell that at least half the field had been looking forward to this tournament for weeks, and that they were feeling every moment of it right now. They had butterflies in their stomachs every time they played a pot. Whenever someone got knocked out the entire room would give them a round of applause. I thought this was wonderful. But some of the players at my table were laughing at this, and making snide remarks about how silly these guys were to be getting so excited for a 50 quid tournament. This was mean-spirited and hugely lacking in understanding of what poker is really all about. I told the table they were all mean buggers and to stop looking down their noses at others: "These guys are enjoying their poker more than any of us have enjoyed playing for years. You should be envying them, not laughing at them."

Part of your job as a poker player is to sustain a game that allows inexperienced players to experience the thrill of playing poker as intensely and joyfully as possible. You don't need to 'give sick action' to do this. Neither do you need to 'pal them up'. All you need to do is to be pleasant at the table, and to do nothing at all that might reduce the enjoyment of your fellow players. If you act well at the table then whenever you see a newer player truly enjoying himself and experiencing the full excitement of poker, then you can think to yourself "My presence at the table is contributing to this game running, and thus to this player having a game to play in. This means I played a small part in allowing this person to feel the intense joy and excitement that he just felt when he played that pot." Even if you have not directly caused that player's enjoyment it is still great to know that you are playing a small part in the pleasure he is having, just through you taking a seat at the table. And, apart from anything, it is wonderful and self-affirming to watch anyone experiencing true joy.

Poker as a game/sport is unique as anyone can play at any chosen level so by its very nature it creates bigger egos which is all this thread is about, any 'luckbox' can bink a big comp which is hard for many players to except hence why losing players 'run bad'
plus nearly all poker players overate their own ability especially after their own first 'bink' its not a new thing it is probably just done in a different way, players now use a lot of overly complicated (imo) jargon in a bid too seperate theirselves from the fish and 'newbies' however it is still just about egos
Poker is probably the most egotistical sport/game in the world bcos absolutely everyone can participate so the differnce in levels between competing players is greater than all other sports

great post and agre 100% wpwp

"Poker is probably the most egotistical sport/game in the world bcos absolutely everyone can participate so the differnce in levels between competing players is greater than all other sports"

This doesn't make sense to me.  The wider the skill margin the lower the need for egostical self boosts.

If I played Tiger Woods in a pro-am golf event, he wouldn't feel the need to give it the big one when he beat me or belittle my poor stroke.

I think the people who stroke their own egos in poker do so because they know deep down that they aren't very far ahead of the recreational player, despite all the hours they have worked at the game.

you have understood what i said then as you just explained it the people with the egos are not the good players but the ones who think they, i probably didn't word it right

 While I was reading this thread my mind went back to long car journies to Cornwall as a child.

 My sister and I would be in the back and my mum and dad would be in the front. Sometimes my sister might pinch me and I might thump her leg. One or other of us would then try and get the other in trouble and my mum would be cross the the one who seemed most at blame.

 At some point either my sister or I would come out with: "He/She started it."

 I think there are some intelligent people in the thread. Surely it's a given that nobody likes old pros who attempt to angle-shoot. Luckily that doesn't happen too often. I would say I have come accross an angle-shoot by an old guy only about three times in the last five years.

 I think we should all be able to agree that for this game to continue it is neccessary to recruit new players all the time and to keep them playing as long as possible. Hard to see how anyone could disagree with that.

 How then is it that many players I have encountered recently can't seem to see that it is the duty of all players who make money from the game, (assuming they'd like that to continue), to not do anything that might discourage new players from returning to play more often (that's the least they should do, even if they feel they aren't capable of/can't be arsed to try and do things to actively encourage these players to return).

 In the last week I have had players tell me it's their right to behave as they like, to be as rude as they like to people and to not give a fuck if old people never come back and play. Obviously it's your right to shit in the street but it may not be the best thing for the community.

 I loved Brad's blog. For me though, the issue has been sidetracked a little by talking exclusively about talking strategy at the table. I certainly think that is a bad thing for the gambling atmosphere. My real beef however is with the younger pros who are only capable of engaging with players of their peer-group, who do so by speaking a language that alienates older recreational players, and who often put down the family guy trying to have a fun hobby and possibly make him reconsider if this game is as much fun as it should be.

 I would like to stress that I am certainly not saying this is all young people and although the group of players I'm describing are young it is certainly not all young people. I played today with an excellent US pro who plays online mtts in the UK. He played very well and he certainly understood that it was good for all of us if we chatted throughout the game. Nobody was excluded and everybody gambled and had fun. He probably got a lot more information from the other players and benefitted from the interaction. All of that is just an added benefit though. The reality is he engaged with some people who were way worse than poker than him, but were still interesting people, because he is a nice guy.

I think interacting with the other players is especially crucial in the WSOP main event.

Do you really want to be bluffing the millionaire options trader or calling down with third pair the guy for whom a min cash would be 12 months wages?

If you've got your iPod on and a sullen look on your face, you'll never know anything about the guys you're playing until its too late.

I guess I'm classed as "old school" because of age and perceived style (flair only in trouser bottoms) even though like so many others came to the game at the height of the Internet boom. I love the banter at the live table and do my fair share of "bantering" so much so that travelling mates have been known to text from some other table on the far side of a poker room with the simple acronyms "ffs stfu!"

I can't remember the last time I didn't say "hi" when coming to the table or even a tap on the table of "gl" at the start of any tourny ( of course you don't mean it but it's sickly nice). I agree with Stu that it is right to make a newbie enjoy the experience and have little time for players who openly belittle. I took my son who plays low stakes online to a small live tourny recently and you could tell from his conversation on the way he was nervously excited at the prospect. Like Stu I envied him that feeling. Sadly he sat on a table of mainly low stake know it alls who ridiculed him as he looked at chip denominations, mucked out of turn and generally struggled. Despite my assurances that he was just unlucky to get a table like that I think it will be a long time before he tries again.

Personally I like the spread of young "pesky" Internet kids and old school at the table. I think there is a place for both and one can't/shouldn't survive without the other.

One thing tho, why do younger players insist on populating every sentence with the word "like?" "I raised like x and he called like y so I clicked it back like and he like called" that does "like" get on my tits "like"

I also enjoyed Guy referring to other players over 40 as if he ain't there yet ;)

Norrrrr! I was reading your post trying to think of a great rub down, and get blown away by that!

I'm mean like, yo, I be 3 bet 5 bet 7 bet reverse jam new York back flip quadruple range merging your ass next time I have the [ ] pleasure of sitting next to you at a table yo

 :)up

"like"

Two improper types of "like":

Firstly, to be like is used as a substitute for to say or to do:

So I was like 'I'm gonna steal those blinds' but the pigeon in the BB wakes up and decides to be all like 'Over my pidgey body'


Secondly, it's a nothing word; just a word you use when you are trying to think of the end of the sentence instead of saying "er..."

So this, like, weirdo sits down and like starts spewing chips all over the place. I'm like loving that until he like cracks my mfkn aces

I think I prefer "like" to the f-word that plenty of people seem to use in the second sense all the time.

"like"

I remember entering my first poker comp at the casino about 10yrs ago. It was really intimidating and moody and I loved it. In Vicky Coren's book she described her first trips to the Vic, the characters, the intimidation, and how she loved it. I don't agree with this notion that new players are shrinking violets who need protecting from mean nasty experienced pros. Obv having fun is a bonus but even rec players are ultimately playing poker to win money so will have the same tenacity as experienced players. Anyway, something a bit sinister about being all nice to newbies as you schmooze their money imo.

I agree in part Mantis, but the ones that don't get intimidated are likely the ones who will persevere to get better. In the main if 'noobies' don't like it they take their money elsewhere.

Personally I think you pick so much more information at the table just being normal and having sociable conversation with others

In my experience, I don't think the generation gap is indicatative of an individual's personality, which is ultimately the heart of the issue. I have seen just as many stone faced, unresponsive 'old school' players completely ignore a new generation internet 'whizz kid' as I have seen the 'whizz kid' berating the 'old school' player.

Conversely, I do think that there's plenty of scope for arguing that it is in fact the newer generation that suffer more at the felt - I've found that they're generally more forgiving to a newbie in the sense of a mistake, probably because there's a transition period of learning that they're more familiar with and able to relate to that an older 'reg' has long forgotten.

Unfortunately, I don't think we are ever going to eliminate this kind of mental attitude from the game. A younger, generally better 'poker' educated player is going to be analytical in his appraisal of any given situation and as a product, he/she is more likely to critique based upon a technical view point.

Ultimately, it's a conversation that's going to make catastrophic generalisations that are unfair to any 'breed' of poker player. I don't think you're ever going to have a table of players that are all the perfect gentleman, take it on the chin wish everyone good luck and trot off.

The easiest solution to a time old problem is for people to speak up and lead by example. Don't leave someone hanging with their greeting, as best as is possible don't berate a player for bad play and without wanting to come across all paternal, just try and gently educate individuals about etiquette and technical procedures.

I think people, especially new players, like to be made to feel welcome and have someone ensure that their understanding of the game is assisted. The rest is up to them, but setting an example that's positive will be noticed even by those most prone to acting adversely.

People will generally join in with the 'mickey taking' if it's seem as the done thing, so it would seem to me that if people set a good example and make a point of trying to help out then others who might have gone the other way will be more inclined to helpfulness.

 Honestly...the problem is way worse than you guys seem to think. It's not a few guys chatting a little strategy in between hands or some guys being shy and refusing to take off their headphones...although those things don't help.

 What I see in every event now is a group of players, (a small subset of young players and it certainly does not include all young players), who are capable of holding a conversation, but all topics will alienate any person not in the clique as it's almost always poker, stories about people that outsiders will not know and boasting about money how much was won and spent. These people totally refuse to engage anyone outside of the clique - they talk over them if they try and join in and they generally simply ignore them.

 Sometimeds they talk strategy, and it is high-level, and often I see them sneering at recreational players and sometimes making comments about how bad they are, as if nobody else can hear what they are saying.

 It's disgusting.

 I have been seeing it in every event I play for over a year now, but it is way worse in the bigger buy-in WSOP events.

Talking about other player's play at the table whilst the other player is there (or even if they're not) is definitely one of the things that makes me cringe.

I don't think these 'regs' understand how bad it is, and how humiliating it can be. It's very much like 'culture shock'. For those who haven't experienced culture shock it happens when you go and live in another country for an extended period of time. It's not when you go on holiday and don't understand something, it's more than that. It's when you become paranoid that people are talking about you, it's when you miss familiar things, and it can really get you down (usually a temporary feeling).

I think it can feel similar to noobrecs in poker. They feel like an outsider to start with, and think that everyone must know everyone else at the table. Then they see some regs chatting between each other, and then there's the laughing joking that they're not part of. If it gets to the stage of them being berated by some of the players who don't seem to care that the subject of their conversation can hear their derogatory comments, this noobrec isn't going to be enjoying his evening as much as he'd hoped.

Poker is a game of incomplete information so when these 'cool kids' are chatting strat they are dishing out free info to everybody else. Whenever you go to poker there are always these groups who tell the table how they would have played this and that type of hand. I would very much like the 'cool kids' to carry on with that really.

For lots of noobrecs, it just emphasises that their knowledge is far below that of others.

They might decide they're better off not bothering with poker (they have no interest in studying the game, it's a hobby ffs and they hated school and don't want to feel like they're back there) and instead do some sports betting and play some golf.

Of course their knowledge will be far below others, but people are more than prepared for that eventuality when they go do something new. If they decide to go and take up golf instead they will be shit at first. They will hack at the ball and miss the ball and face the embarrassment of it in front of much better players. If they want to get better at golf they will persevere and practice and they will get better. Who decided that new poker players don't have tenacity and perseverance?

Some certainly do. Some certainly don't.

Survivor bias leaves behind the ones that do. How many gave up long ago and decided they'd rather burn their money on irons and woods rather than with the sharks at their local poker room?

I don't see the downside of saying 'let's do what we can to ensure people have a good time when they play with us'.

You don't have to be a redcoat, but it's nice to be nice.

I was playing £1/2 at the hippodrome last night and there were two very drunk guys at my table. One of the regs was getting annoyed at the drunk guys for slowing the game up, complaining to the dealer, asking for the floor, and abusing the drunk guy verbally. I was shocked and berated/took the piss out of him massively for it. Idiotic behaviour. The idea that you would come to play poker on a friday night, in Leicester Square, and not have to deal with casual poker players who were also drinking? WTF.

It really is solely due to ego, because it's quite faceless poker any superstar player could sit down and you wouldn't know what he's won and how good he is, some people just can't handle the fact that they've sat down and aren''t immediately revered as a superstar when they've won so much money "Man, I won the BIG 162, SCOOP #17 HIGH and came third in the sunday 500 in the last 2 weeks, taking my online "winnings" to over $2,000,000 and this fucking window salesman from cleveland doesn't know or care - WHAT IS WITH THAT"

I was playing in monte carlo and was on a table with a couple of US mtt hotshots, they were talking and being pretty cringe, no interest in anyone else - a guy sat down who I'd been playing cash games with all week (v nice guy) I chatted with him a bit and when he bust he asked me if I wanted to help him start a 25/50 OMaha game when the day was over, I said sure, he went off. Now the american kids say to me, in front of everyone "wow, nice life you got the fish chasing YOU for games" I looked around the table at 3 or 4 guys in their mid-40's who it seems unlikely play poker as a living and just wanna have a punt in this tournament... was pretty speechless tbh.

Did you venture to respond "Have you ever thought of...y'know...being less of a dick?" ?

Dave, did you say anything to these hotshots about this? Either during the game, or in private afterwards?

I strongly believe that it is crucial that we challenge this sort of behaviour whenever we see it. It does not necessarily have to be done across the table, and it can be done nicely. But we should aim to always say something to these guys when we see them behaving in such ways.

Most of these players are not bad people, and neither are they stupid. They just don't 'get it' yet. IMO it is our duty to speak to them and try to explain how it works. In the hope that the penny will drop. Even if you just make things click for one in ten people you speak to, then it is worth it. And it is HUGE for the long-term health of poker.

We need to lead by example obviously. But that is not enough in itself. Pulling players to one side and discussing how to behave (and explaining why) is something that just has to be done. If someone is a dick about it and refuses to even listen... well unlucky, you were drawing dead with that one. But I tend to have faith in human nature, and believe that most of these guys can be shown the right way of acting, and the right way of thinking about how poker really works.

We should challenge Americans when they behave like idiots? Good luck with that.

Do we know for sure the nice guy or the mid-40's guys were truly offended by this remark? Or are we just assuming that? I would say people in their 40's have enough life experience to take such remarks in their stride. Maybe these guys enjoy seeing misplaced arrogance and deduce it as weakness. Maybe it gives them extra motivation to bust the loud-mouthed ignorant yanks? I'm kinda intrigued by the argument that everybody should be nice but want to see evidence and stats that things like 'remarks' really do damage poker. Think we take offence on behalf of others in all aspects of life these days. As it is I enjoy seeing the different and diverse characters at a poker table, good and bad.

Not gonna be possible to find evidence or stats for this sort of thing.

The death knell venue for players 'what fink they are better than everyone else' has to be Luton.

Many a time 'the sophisticated operators' have left in tears, with laughter ringing in their ears, and just to confim their fears,  this has been going on for years, as Vinny steps up the gears, or 'runs into' Edna       .....     that 'old dear'.

Poker should be enjoyable, and @ Luton the entertainment is pretty consistent - they mercilessly rib everyone: the good, the bad, the young, the old     ....      and themselves!

You might not make the money, but most go home with a 'fun, banter filled, night' to remember (unless they've had to sit next to Tom Myland longer than 10 minutes   ....   but that's why The Samaritans' Helpline operates 24/7).

Smile, joke, converse with your fellow players - you might find you even like them (Tom Myland excepted)    ....     afterall, its only a game of bloody cards!