Can a social player just be as good as someone who plays daily?

[fordman427]

If they stay at the same stakes then maybe but if player A goes up in stakes he will most likely be better

 

[chipstacker]

It depends, on the situation. To look like a pro all you have to do is be patient. If you only play good hands with a higher percentage to win you are less likely to lose a hand and look like someone who isnt that good. However if you start memorizing peoples reactions and actions according to what hand they had and how strong they were, then yes a social player can def play as well as a pro.

 

[bezobrazny]

The best poker players are sociopats and psychopathic crew but that side is allowed to be showen only during the game of poker.

 

[timko12]

can you play a lot you Joba read play, but if we do not also rested on a professional level rise.

 

[rock0001]

The best poker players are sociopats and psychopathic crew but that side is allowed to be showen only during the game of poker.

psychopath and sociopaths may be very good bluffers, however if they dont get what they want and for example suffers a bad beat, or someone reads them, they will become very irritating with these player and wont stay focused on the game Thats the reason most of them prefer to scam and steal naive people instead of playing poker.

 

[IM deusXmachina]

in my opinion, it comes doen to where they "are" mentally. Poker is 90% mental and 20% skill, and a variable percentage of winning DOES involve luck...lest we forget that part of the GAME gentleman....

 

[herpies]

Player A has the POTENTIAL to make more money on the poker table but he can also LOSE it. Poker have their swings and misses. Player B will have the same risk involve but he is not at risk as much because most of his time is spent at work. As long as Player B continues to play it everyday, he won't be rusty but his instinct may not be as sharp as Player A

Poker is 20% skills, 50% mental and 30% luck. This is my opinion.

 

[Sortuto]

in my opinion, it comes doen to where they "are" mentally. Poker is 90% mental and 20% skill, and a variable percentage of winning DOES involve luck...lest we forget that part of the GAME gentleman....

So you know that there is no room for 90% + 20% in 100%, right? Unless Poker is a game 110%!

Sorry just kidding.

 

[sam1chips]

Or is poker just like riding a bike? You learn as much as you can, and you never forget it, meaning you can play a lot less but be just as profitable.

Think about riding a bike...there are people that ride bikes recreational-ly (who I assume don't spend too much time practicing their bike riding skills), and then there are people like the X-Games riders who are practicing riding their bike like it is a full time job. Who is a better bike rider?

For a more straight-forward answer, if you accept poker as a skill-game (similar to basketball, chess, or bike-riding), then the person who practices more should end up being more-skilled.

 

[sam1chips]

Bike rider 'A' & Bike rider 'B' will both be able to ride a bike but I know that Bike Rider 'B' doesn't have a hope in hell of making it on the Olympic Cycling team... nevermind even getting a chance to compete at the trials.
.. same goes with poker

I didn't see this PO before I wrote my original response. We seemed to have the same idea haha

 

[DaveE]

Let's say there are two people who play a lot and the same amount of time....we call them Player A and Player B. These players are two great players who are about equal in skill. They play 5 hours a day for a few years. The next year it changes for Player B.

Player A plays poker for a living. He spends atleast 5 hours a day on poker and makes a lot of profit.

Player B gets a "normal" job, but continues to play poker about 6-8 hours a week. He makes about the same profit (on average) as player A.

Will this trend continue to be true? Will Player A eventually out perform Player B due to just spending a lot more time at the tables.

Or is poker just like riding a bike? You learn as much as you can, and you never forget it, meaning you can play a lot less but be just as profitable.

I hope this makes sense.

Short term...weekly games, individual sessions (low volume)...resultswise...yes

Long term grinding/volume....no, rec guy would have a lot of catching up to do.

 

[Chemist]

Quote: Originally Posted by Poker Orifice
Bike rider 'A' & Bike rider 'B' will both be able to ride a bike but I know that Bike Rider 'B' doesn't have a hope in hell of making it on the Olympic Cycling team... nevermind even getting a chance to compete at the trials.
.. same goes with poker

I didn't see this PO before I wrote my original response. We seemed to have the same idea haha

I think you are both missing the point and restating the question.
Bike riding needs strength, stamina and training, but poker is not physical.
If someone trained 24 hours a day at chess could they beat a former grandmaster that hadn't played for a year?
My money is on the former grandmaster than the intensely training sam1chips.

Would anyone here playing 10 hours a day like to put their own money up against a part time playing Doyle Brunson or Phil Helmuth.