N
nameless1537
Rock Star
I think it's kind of a loaded question. It's one thing to understand the theories that drive the play. But it's another to manage your own emotions and limit damage from tilt. That is just as much as part of "mastering poker" than playing the cards. And then it's to understand what drives your opponents and possibly being able to predict their moves before they know what they will do in some instances.
Of those three areas that I mentioned, the most straightforward one, IMO, is to understand the theory that dries the play. Mastering your emotions and understanding your opponents? I think those are the skills that will take you a lifetime to master.
Of those three areas that I mentioned, the most straightforward one, IMO, is to understand the theory that dries the play. Mastering your emotions and understanding your opponents? I think those are the skills that will take you a lifetime to master.
Last edited:
V
Vander44
Rock Star
Even though it has recently been debunked I like to think to become an expert or master a skill you need 10,000 hours of practice. This common rule of thumb, was popularized by Malcom Gladwell in his bestseller Outliers: The Story of Success. The rule is flawed because it focuses on the amount of time spent practicing, and not the quality of the practice but I think it still give you an idea of the amount of deliberate practice you need to master a skill.
Jon Poker
Legend
Just incase no one has said it yet - never. 
You guys are right - the way the game is navigated by top level players is constantly evolving. When you think you know all there is to learn - that is when the others who are willing to work harder than you - leave you in the dust.
You guys are right - the way the game is navigated by top level players is constantly evolving. When you think you know all there is to learn - that is when the others who are willing to work harder than you - leave you in the dust.
NWPatriot
Rock Star
What an amazing question. Simple, yet unanswerable.
There have been about 1900 chess grandmasters in the world, out of 800+ million chess players. Chess is a game that can be mastered as it is a stable game with no randomness (with the exception of the competition). This is an extremely small % of players. The poker equivalent might be the Poker Hall of Fame which has 58 people in it and has been in existence for less than 50 years, as opposed to 180 yrs for the chess grandmaster title. But this is really not a fair comparison as the PHOF is a US only thing and may have a bit of a different function than the committee that defines who qualifies as a grandmaster.
Poker is not stable (it is changing constantly) and it has randomness (the 52 cards) at its core. We can understand poker and we can become proficient at poker until we move up in stakes and then we have to do it again. There are a few masters - we all know their names, but notice how the names change over time. This speaks to the lack of stability and constant change. If it were stable, I suspect there wouldn't so much rollover in the names at the top, though new names would certainly appear.
Some names do continue to appear through the decades. These are the poker grandmasters. The common man will never become this person. These people have special traits and characteristics and a unique drive that allow them to become who they are. You must decide why you play. To have fun? To become good enough to win? To become the best in the world? These are all much different levels of commitment.
Good luck in your journey. Have fun!
There have been about 1900 chess grandmasters in the world, out of 800+ million chess players. Chess is a game that can be mastered as it is a stable game with no randomness (with the exception of the competition). This is an extremely small % of players. The poker equivalent might be the Poker Hall of Fame which has 58 people in it and has been in existence for less than 50 years, as opposed to 180 yrs for the chess grandmaster title. But this is really not a fair comparison as the PHOF is a US only thing and may have a bit of a different function than the committee that defines who qualifies as a grandmaster.
Poker is not stable (it is changing constantly) and it has randomness (the 52 cards) at its core. We can understand poker and we can become proficient at poker until we move up in stakes and then we have to do it again. There are a few masters - we all know their names, but notice how the names change over time. This speaks to the lack of stability and constant change. If it were stable, I suspect there wouldn't so much rollover in the names at the top, though new names would certainly appear.
Some names do continue to appear through the decades. These are the poker grandmasters. The common man will never become this person. These people have special traits and characteristics and a unique drive that allow them to become who they are. You must decide why you play. To have fun? To become good enough to win? To become the best in the world? These are all much different levels of commitment.
Good luck in your journey. Have fun!
