Originally Posted by Odysseus101
I agree with PapaC above, I'd find it hard to believe that unless the advice given was literally during the play that the advisor should stand to gain nothing by giving bad advice on purpose. I mean seriously, I'd have to give you a ton of bad advice, hoping you take it, then follow you around on whatever site you're playing and bet hard against you in order for my actions to have any payoff. It seems bizarre to me.
Some interesting replies here I think I appreciate Odysseus101 statement the most. Seems like a lot of work to target someone.
While I am trying to become adept at poker I qualify most of my posts with the fact that I am not a proven successful player(aka not an expert but...).
The other thing is, given the varied play on the WSOP
it does not appear that there is any "Right" way of playing. Watching (forget the pro's name) make a call that was insane because he had a "feeling" and then watched as his card hit with like a 4-6% chance is bewildering at best.
Another example I can think of is this young guy few years ago hitting a very low pair (2 or 3) was not shaken at all by larger bets from his opponent (H2H) that had a better starting hand called flop and turn and even river to win the pot.. Commentators initially stated the guy was nuts and extremely lucky. Phil Helmuth piped in the kid had a great read!
My point is you can get conflicting advice does not necessarily mean one is wrong vs the other, you have to learn how to incorporate said advice into your style of play and if you can't, maybe that advice is not for you, so look elsewhere or figure something else out for yourself.
Just my opinion.