Shades or no Shades

[ChipRich]

lol at this thread.

Ridic statement to say its not real poker. Props are now part of poker however way you look at it, if you like it or not.

Think some1s been trapped in a time warp imo.






Someone was bound to do it...

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: George2Loose

I think your trivialising the point a little. Your basically saying any professional player who wears shades is wearing them as a gimmick OR that they're not playing real poker.

OK let me be serious instead of trivial for a moment. I think wearing an ipod is to play sub-optimally. Now a pro like Phil Hellmuth can afford to play sub-optimally. He is a millionaire, has probably been bought into the tournament he's playing in, plays so much the game is a drag in the early stages of big comps, must get pestered all the time, and his experience and edge are significant enough to make this plausible.

When things get serious though, such as a Final Table, Hellmuth is now interested in listening, because he knows how vital it is. He wants to bring his A-game to the final.

If I was going to copy what Hellmuth does I would want to mimic his end A-game play not his start of a tournament B-game play. I don't have the edge and experience Hellmuth has so think listening from the start is more important for me than it is for him.

Those amateurs who think wearing an ipod because Hellmuth does and so feel it will make them a better player are on the wrong track imo. The conditions for us are not the same as the conditions for him. Don't know what this has to do with timewarp though, and although I enjoyed the video, maybe the boys can explain the point further.

[Karabiner]

What if your shades have prescription lenses ?

Is it okay for spectacles-wearers to have tinted lenses without being a tit ?

Or is the degree of titness directly related to the lightess/darkness of the tinted lens ?

We need to know or the FACT key may become redundant on this issue.

[I KNOW IT]

Posted by: George2Loose

I think your trivialising the point a little. Your basically saying any professional player who wears shades is wearing them as a gimmick OR that they're not playing real poker.

OK let me be serious instead of trivial for a moment. I think wearing an ipod is to play sub-optimally. Now a pro like Phil Hellmuth can afford to play sub-optimally. He is a millionaire, has probably been bought into the tournament he's playing in, plays so much the game is a drag in the early stages of big comps, must get pestered all the time, and his experience and edge are significant enough to make this plausible.

When things get serious though, such as a Final Table, Hellmuth is now interested in listening, because he knows how vital it is. He wants to bring his A-game to the final.

If I was going to copy what Hellmuth does I would want to mimic his end A-game play not his start of a tournament B-game play. I don't have the edge and experience Hellmuth has so think listening from the start is more important for me than it is for him.

Those amateurs who think wearing an ipod because Hellmuth does and so feel it will make them a better player are on the wrong track imo. The conditions for us are not the same as the conditions for him. Don't know what this has to do with timewarp though, and although I enjoyed the video, maybe the boys can explain the point further.

I think most major tournaments ban all electrical devices such as ipods when you get to the money stages. I know the WSOP does

[kinboshi]

Posted by: George2Loose

I think your trivialising the point a little. Your basically saying any professional player who wears shades is wearing them as a gimmick OR that they're not playing real poker.

OK let me be serious instead of trivial for a moment. I think wearing an ipod is to play sub-optimally. Now a pro like Phil Hellmuth can afford to play sub-optimally. He is a millionaire, has probably been bought into the tournament he's playing in, plays so much the game is a drag in the early stages of big comps, must get pestered all the time, and his experience and edge are significant enough to make this plausible.

When things get serious though, such as a Final Table, Hellmuth is now interested in listening, because he knows how vital it is. He wants to bring his A-game to the final.

If I was going to copy what Hellmuth does I would want to mimic his end A-game play not his start of a tournament B-game play. I don't have the edge and experience Hellmuth has so think listening from the start is more important for me than it is for him.

Those amateurs who think wearing an ipod because Hellmuth does and so feel it will make them a better player are on the wrong track imo. The conditions for us are not the same as the conditions for him. Don't know what this has to do with timewarp though, and although I enjoyed the video, maybe the boys can explain the point further.

So, what do you think when you see a player at your table and he has earphones plugged in?

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: kinboshi

So, what do you think when you see a player at your table and he has earphones plugged in?

That they're not as tuned into the game as they could be, they are quite experienced, and may play the game from a maths perspective. But nothing of any substance until I see how they play.

Let me throw this question into the debate. Should players be allowed to use an odds calculator like a mini poker stove device at the table? If you are a maths star but struggle with confidence you can put on shades to help you with that weakness in your game. If you are a people star but struggle with maths an odds calculator would help you with that weakness in your game? So why are aids for some weaknesses allowed but aids for other weaknesses not?

[bolt pp]

Posted by: kinboshi

So, what do you think when you see a player at your table and he has earphones plugged in?

That they're not as tuned into the game as they could be, they are quite experienced, and may play the game from a maths perspective. But nothing of any substance until I see how they play.

Let me throw this question into the debate. Should players be allowed to use an odds calculator like a mini poker stove device at the table? If you are a maths star but struggle with confidence you can put on shades to help you with that weakness in your game. If you are a people star but struggle with maths an odds calculator would help you with that weakness in your game? So why are aids for some weaknesses allowed but aids for other weaknesses not?

because wearing sunglasses is a long standing convention of the game(ive seen em wearing them in 30s poker films so it must be true) and i'm sure not everyone shares your opinion about them being an aid for weakness.

I dont really think you can throw that question into the debate because it's not balanced, pokerstove is a comparatively new mathematical aid that coincides with the online development of the game and gives a clear edge as it allows a more precise calculation in comparison to someone doing pot odds calc in their head and working out it's "about" 4-1, sunglasses dont give an opponent an edge really, only in that it may make them feel a tad more confident in their live game and thats not an edge.

ipod's neither here nor there, as you concede, an ipod is an encumbrance to gaining information.

[kinboshi]

Posted by: kinboshi

So, what do you think when you see a player at your table and he has earphones plugged in?

That they're not as tuned into the game as they could be, they are quite experienced, and may play the game from a maths perspective. But nothing of any substance until I see how they play.

Let me throw this question into the debate. Should players be allowed to use an odds calculator like a mini poker stove device at the table? If you are a maths star but struggle with confidence you can put on shades to help you with that weakness in your game. If you are a people star but struggle with maths an odds calculator would help you with that weakness in your game? So why are aids for some weaknesses allowed but aids for other weaknesses not?

Just wondered.  If you form an opinion on them because they have earphones in, then they might have an edge on you. 

[jizzemm]

Just wondered.  If you form an opinion on them because they have earphones in, then they might have an edge on you. 

I was sort of thinking along the same lines as well.. Because

My first ever final table I wore some sunglasses. Liam Flood made fun of me so I never wore them again lol.

and thought that Liam Flood got you to do what he wanted, he did not like you having them on.. maybe

[julian]

music can be a great motivator & that's the reason i tune in...a 15 min burst every so often can really give you a lift or, if needed calm you down.
when the spirit is low & every move is the wrong play a strategic beck's can also work wonders too 
i used to wear shades occasionally & they helped my confidence if there was a heavy hitter or two on the table - nowadays it's prob only on a bright tv table that i'd get them out as i think it is more intimidating eyeballing someone eye to eye...you lookin at me??

[kinboshi]

music can be a great motivator & that's the reason i tune in...a 15 min burst every so often can really give you a lift or, if needed calm you down.
when the spirit is low & every move is the wrong play a strategic beck's can also work wonders too 
i used to wear shades occasionally & they helped my confidence if there was a heavy hitter or two on the table - nowadays it's prob only on a bright tv table that i'd get them out as i think it is more intimidating eyeballing someone eye to eye...you lookin at me??

Tell us more about the details of the 'strategic becks' approach.  Is there an optimum level of frequency and quantity?  Is it restricted to Becks, or is Guinness a viable alternative?

(I'm only talking live poker here)

[Claw75]

music can be a great motivator & that's the reason i tune in...a 15 min burst every so often can really give you a lift or, if needed calm you down.
when the spirit is low & every move is the wrong play a strategic beck's can also work wonders too 
i used to wear shades occasionally & they helped my confidence if there was a heavy hitter or two on the table - nowadays it's prob only on a bright tv table that i'd get them out as i think it is more intimidating eyeballing someone eye to eye...you lookin at me??

Tell us more about the details of the 'strategic becks' approach.  Is there an optimum level of frequency and quantity?  Is it restricted to Becks, or is Guinness a viable alternative?

(I'm only talking live poker here)

you can use vodka too.

[julian]

after extensive research all i can reveal is that frequency/quantity-wise it is a 'fine line'.
i see no reason why guinness wouldn't fit the bill altho i do try to stear clear of the vino...too sleep inducing

[Dewi_cool]

I have been testing the Guinness theory out & as Julian said there is a fine line, too much induces calls with bottom pair, too little, folds with top pair. Obviously this is work in progress full report expected circa March 2045.

[Claw75]

after extensive research all i can reveal is that frequency/quantity-wise it is a 'fine line'.
i see no reason why guinness wouldn't fit the bill altho i do try to stear clear of the vino...too sleep inducing

It is a very fine line indeed.  I think for me there are only one or two sips between super dooper poker player who owns the table to complete donk on the rail.