Padraig bets Alex Martin $10,000 he can beat the .25/.50 game!

[the sicilian]

Playing poker optimally or close to optimally is incredibly rare in poker. I would have thought no more than 1% of all players ever play anywhere near optimally for any period of time. Anytime most players feel that they are playing close optimally they are almost certainly just running good. Almost all of the players that do play close to optimally will be top internet professionals. Blonde has some of these players for example Flushy, Moorman and Pab, none of them would claim to play optimally all of the time. I am sure that they play optimally for a higher percentage of the time than for practical purposes every pre internet live circuit professional.

Discussion of the topic of optimal play wasn't my intention when I posted on this thread; knowing Alex well as I do was just joining in the banter that I felt had been incorrectly labelled as 'ill mannered vitriol'. Accurately conveying the intended mood when posting in a forum isn't always easy and I got it wrong again. Being respectful and polite to people within a poker context and outside of the poker environment is something that is hugely important to me.

I see no reason why the old pro vs internet whizz should ever be anything other a good natured debate. Like all good subjects for debate both sides are sure there is plenty of merit in their side of the discussion.



 

What criteria qualifys for the title 'internet whizz' ?

[boldie]

Playing poker optimally or close to optimally is incredibly rare in poker. I would have thought no more than 1% of all players ever play anywhere near optimally for any period of time. Anytime most players feel that they are playing close optimally they are almost certainly just running good. Almost all of the players that do play close to optimally will be top internet professionals. Blonde has some of these players for example Flushy, Moorman and Pab, none of them would claim to play optimally all of the time. I am sure that they play optimally for a higher percentage of the time than for practical purposes every pre internet live circuit professional.

Discussion of the topic of optimal play wasn't my intention when I posted on this thread; knowing Alex well as I do was just joining in the banter that I felt had been incorrectly labelled as 'ill mannered vitriol'. Accurately conveying the intended mood when posting in a forum isn't always easy and I got it wrong again. Being respectful and polite to people within a poker context and outside of the poker environment is something that is hugely important to me.

I see no reason why the old pro vs internet whizz should ever be anything other a good natured debate. Like all good subjects for debate both sides are sure there is plenty of merit in their side of the discussion.



 

What criteria qualifys for the title 'internet whizz' ?

run as good as Moorman.

[the sicilian]

Or any Moorman for that matter....

[Dale]

this thread has run way off course

back to the matter at hand imo.....

is PP going to spend his spare 10K buying westlife and b*witched songs for the radio show or not?

[Dubai]

In and want a share of the action, especially if there is like a 20k minimum number of hands that he needs to play

[pokerfan]

In and want a share of the action, especially if there is like a 20k minimum number of hands that he needs to play

So over 20k hands how many bb/100 would make the bet fair to both parties?

[MANTIS01]

Playing poker optimally or close to optimally is incredibly rare in poker. I would have thought no more than 1% of all players ever play anywhere near optimally for any period of time. Anytime most players feel that they are playing close optimally they are almost certainly just running good. Almost all of the players that do play close to optimally will be top internet professionals. Blonde has some of these players for example Flushy, Moorman and Pab, none of them would claim to play optimally all of the time. I am sure that they play optimally for a higher percentage of the time than for practical purposes every pre internet live circuit professional.

Discussion of the topic of optimal play wasn't my intention when I posted on this thread; knowing Alex well as I do was just joining in the banter that I felt had been incorrectly labelled as 'ill mannered vitriol'. Accurately conveying the intended mood when posting in a forum isn't always easy and I got it wrong again. Being respectful and polite to people within a poker context and outside of the poker environment is something that is hugely important to me.

I see no reason why the old pro vs internet whizz should ever be anything other a good natured debate. Like all good subjects for debate both sides are sure there is plenty of merit in their side of the discussion.



 

What criteria qualifys for the title 'internet whizz' ?

virgin?

[Ironside]

Playing poker optimally or close to optimally is incredibly rare in poker. I would have thought no more than 1% of all players ever play anywhere near optimally for any period of time. Anytime most players feel that they are playing close optimally they are almost certainly just running good. Almost all of the players that do play close to optimally will be top internet professionals. Blonde has some of these players for example Flushy, Moorman and Pab, none of them would claim to play optimally all of the time. I am sure that they play optimally for a higher percentage of the time than for practical purposes every pre internet live circuit professional.

Discussion of the topic of optimal play wasn't my intention when I posted on this thread; knowing Alex well as I do was just joining in the banter that I felt had been incorrectly labelled as 'ill mannered vitriol'. Accurately conveying the intended mood when posting in a forum isn't always easy and I got it wrong again. Being respectful and polite to people within a poker context and outside of the poker environment is something that is hugely important to me.

I see no reason why the old pro vs internet whizz should ever be anything other a good natured debate. Like all good subjects for debate both sides are sure there is plenty of merit in their side of the discussion.



 

What criteria qualifys for the title 'internet whizz' ?

virgin?

so thats the shrewdies in then

[PSpillane]

not sure this is allowed, try it anyway and apologies if it isnt.
First 3 shows archived

http://www.boylesports.asp/sections/poker/d.asp?show=ThePokerShow_Archives

[Madone]

I think this thread is a joke everyone abusing Padriag...he is a character and from what i see of poker players nowdyas there aint many about...just people with big egos and no personality whatsoever!

LONG LIVE PADRAIG and his humour!

[kukushkin88]

Is there really much abusing of Padraig? Have another look, the general consensus is that he's a good guy that adds a lot to poker and does a lot of admirable work for charity.

[Ironside]

we have to admit that allothough padraig is a great guy his judging of poker playing abilty is pretty poor

after i got lucky turning the nuts against him he tried to tell marcel luske that i could out play him

[AlexMartin]

ok, i just played 7k hands of 50nl. Winrate, 1.2bb/100. The games are riddled with shortstacks and nits with very few fish.

This would be a great bet if someone was interested. I am sure Padraig is a great player but i doubt he would have the skills to beat this game. A 200nl player with a 3bb/100 winrate would be a -0.5bb/100 loser at 50nl after increased rake if his game was identical but scaled down on ipoker (thanks Keys/2+2). Lump on Dubai.

 

[MC]

ok, i just played 7k hands of 50nl. Winrate, 1.2bb/100. The games are riddled with shortstacks and nits with very few fish.

This would be a great bet if someone was interested. I am sure Padraig is a great player but i doubt he would have the skills to beat this game. A 200nl player with a 3bb/100 winrate would be a -0.5bb/100 loser at 50nl after increased rake if his game was identical but scaled down on ipoker (thanks Keys/2+2). Lump on Dubai.

Definitely agree with this...

[cambo]

lol why is there 12 guests viewing this thread?