You really ought to read this.......

[vegaslover]

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.

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.

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!!!

[Ant040689]

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.

[rfgqqabc]

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.

[nirvana]

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

[celtic]

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.

[titaniumbean]

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.....

[rfgqqabc]

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.

[titaniumbean]

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


IS IT

[Tal]

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.

[outragous76]

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

[titaniumbean]

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.

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.

[titaniumbean]

It's more about how his perceptions of poker have changed. Perception is reality.

Its perception vs romantic notion thou

brevity ftw

+1

[Tal]

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

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.

[Tal]

It's more about how his perceptions of poker have changed. Perception is reality.

Its perception vs romantic notion thou

brevity ftw

+1

Alright, Polonius!

[titaniumbean]

It's more about how his perceptions of poker have changed. Perception is reality.

Its perception vs romantic notion thou

brevity ftw

+1

Alright, Polonius!

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