[Magic Koala]

Originally Posted by Poboy

I think the young guys' attitude you describe is partly their age (everyone under 25 doesn't just have opinions, they have strong ones) and partly that their style plays well in tournaments. They take advantage of the freezeout/timed nature of tournaments, and the fact that the caller needs a better hand than a shover. In a cash game, their style would be very volatile.

Have to agree with this. I see this all the time in the card room. Just like yesterday, some college kid will sit at the $ NL table, take one or two big pots down with some crazy all-ins. But inevitably, some old guy with a members-only jacket will eventually bust him out several times forcing the kid to do multiple rebuys within the hour. Kid disappears, and you see him at the tournament with more of his buddies. And they do suprisingly well.

[yeltzen]

This type of play will go away when it stops winning tournaments. As much as you might hate it, the winners of major tournaments more often than not are guys that play a loose-aggressive style. It works. The pros don't want to play preflop all-in poker, and the internet kids are taking advantage of it.

Hold'em is ridiculously easy to play, and you don't need to be very good to win at it, especially in tournaments. Yeah, you need to be pretty good to win consistently, but who cares when you can win one tournament and be set for life?
These guys seem to be pretty good at reading players, and they don't have any fear. So they play a game of chicken, and they pick up a lot of chips if it works. And the more chips they have, the more their style works, and so on.

[jojobinks]

michael dimichelle didn't make that statement up (about the dark ages); he basically stole it from the introduction of "mathematics of poker", and he's right.

chen/ankenman state that when mathematics-based enterprises are basically dominated by "feel" people, who learn through experience and follow common knowledge truisms, there's room for a lot of improvement. as example: bond and options markets before the 90s. backgammon before 10 years ago (now the best player in the world, without doubt, is a piece of software you can buy for a couple hundred bucks). and poker.

i think it's kinda ironic that you mention doyle, btw. his section on nlhe in s/s is by far the most aggro of any advice you'll find in writing anywhere. he was right.

the internet "maniacs" are doing very well for themselves, and there's a reason why. there are fads in poker, but this isn't one of them.

ps: i apologize in advance, gun, but you sound like someone's grandpa in the OP, complaining about these young kids with their rock and roll, and how if you want to listen to some real music, you need to hear fill in blank of some chump from 1940 that sang bicycle built for two.

ps: semi-spoiler warning: internet maniac currently in the process of wiping out the bellagio cup main event final table.

[_GUN_]

Originally Posted by jojobinks

ps: i apologize in advance, gun, but you sound like someone's grandpa in the OP...

oh Matt, is there anything more constant at CT, than your sublime skill in repartee? there's a reason there's a grand in grandpa . not really my intention to sound like a dinosaur, afterall, I've only played hold'em about 3yrs. I just wanted opinions and I got them...mission accomplished. you don't have to apologize, Matt, I treasure your adroitness.

[shadesofgrey]

couldnt vote... not swedish.... hold'em has its place!

i agree NLHE MainEVENT is kinda being defaced vs. half mile away from the county fair - SoG

there are better games to play! i gotti loose scured home games w = 1/2 Omaha HI/HI&LO/HE/Tennesse? M = still in the game & love harrington! I like cash = how big are the dreams?

players are players... i think its HORSE!

playing my SoG "non-ramble-on" card!

thanks to you i'm much obliged CT & _GUN_...

sometimes i am tired & ramble - but i know what i gotta do to a table - no time for spreading rumors .... QQs have tails i like! find my babies!!

[Wooderson]

_GUN_, are you framilliar with Shania? She's a-changin'. And she always will.

Matt's right though. Bicycle Built for Two isn't great anymore.

[sunderB]

Originally Posted by Wooderson

Matt's right though. Bicycle Built for Two isn't great anymore.

Especially when you can get a bicycle built for 4 from Palm Imports!

[the3rd]

Originally Posted by jojobinks

ps: i apologize in advance, gun, but you sound like someone's grandpa in the OP, complaining about these young kids with their rock and roll, and how if you want to listen to some real music, you need to hear fill in blank of some chump from 1940 that sang bicycle built for two.

[shadesofgrey]

Originally Posted by the3rd

[beekeeper]

I've only been playing hold'em for 2 years, so I don't feel qualified to answer.

Because I don't know what poker used to be like, I can only say what I think it's like now. It seems like it's constantly evolving--at a rapid pace. The average player seems much more agressive than when I first got interested in poker. But the "name" players seem to still be successful. Better players than I can even fantacize being seem to be able to counter the new players with skill. I guess it depends on what whats-his-name considers to be the "dark ages." I'd much rather watch a telivised match between Doyle Brunson, Chip Reese, Carlos Mortenson, Joe Awada, Scott Fishman, Phil Ivy, Ted Forrest and Freddy Deeb than watch that kid with the big "jew" fro, the guy you mention in your thread, and their ilk play--but that's probably just a reflection of the state of my understanding of poker.

I don't even bother registering on 2+2 because, frankly, the discussions intimidate me. People are either flaming others for voicing an opinion, or saying something is an easy decision, DUCY, when I'm still trying to figure out the writer's question. (Or going off on tangents about how hot, fat, ugly, or slutty any given female player is). I'm guessing that a lot of internet players post on 2+2. There seems to be a method to their madness, but I come away from reading 2+2 thinking, "I guess I'd rather be lucky than good."