Log-in members only
Raw Talent (from the Chris Hinschliffe thread)This is a discussion thread · 107 replies Daniel Negreanu: [nq:1]Daniel, I've been wondering about this quote for a long time. I'm just curious as to what you mean when ... as it is both visceral and visibile, I'm just curious as to what you are referring in a poker context.[/nq]Basically someone with "raw talent" is born with great instincts about people, logic, and card sense. I have a friend who makes a good living playing 80-160 through 200-400 hold'em that's never read a poker book in his life, or never even discussed strategy all that much. You know how in school some people in math class just "get it" while others don't? Well my friend just "gets" poker in that same way. Of course studying could only make him a much better player, but he "gets by" on sheer talent. There may be a misconception that I think you can get by on talent alone. That's about the furthest thing from the truth. Without discipline or an understanding of the fundamentals, talent can only get you so far. What I will say though, is that WITHOUT talent you can become a very competent player, but you'll never be a great player. Chris Hinschliffe in my opinion has all the tools to become a great player. His fundamentals are poor, and he makes rookie mistakes that with experience he'll cease to make. When he does, I think he could be a limit hold'em monster. He's creative, aggressive, and gutsy. There are a ton of brilliant guys out there playing the big tournament circuit that have a great mathematical understanding of the game, but simply lack the talent to read people. I'd name some names, but I'm afraid I couldn't do that without insulting them in some way. I don't care how many poker simulations they run, or how much they understand of game theory, without those raw instincts that just tell you, "he's got it this time" they'll never reach the top. I often see "math guys" go through decisions on the river like this: "Well the pot is laying me 7-1 and he might be bluffing. All I need to catch is one bluff out of seven to break even, I call." This thought process basically turns them into calling stations. What they often miss in their calculation is the posture of their opponent... their opponent's neck muscles twitching...the comments he might make... the way he bet the hand... the way he put the chips in the pot... what he looked like the last time you caught him bluffing. I could go on and on with intangible after intangible. Point being, their obsession with the great price they are being laid often makes them ignore all the clues that might let them know that 7-1 is actually a TERRIBLE price in certain cases! More often than not though, they simply don't know what to look for, and if they saw it they may not have the talent to understand what it meant. So when I say that I think Chris Hinschliffe has "raw talent" I'm saying that I think he has the ability to sniff out strength and weakness, has good card sense, a great imagination, and guts. To complete the package though he'll need to work on discipline and fundamentals. Discipline he should get from experience, and fundamental knowledge can be learned from various books and software. Most all of the "legends" or great players of our time were "hustlers" turned poker players. All successful hustlers understand people and how to manipulate their mind. This post is getting to long, but there is somethins else I wanted to share in a seperate post about showing your cards, or not showing your cards. Hustlers show cards, math guys don't. I'll try to explain why... Daniel Negreanu www.fullcontactpoker.com
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
jham: [nq:1]What they often miss in their calculation is the posture of their opponent... their opponent's neck muscles twitching...the comments he ... what to look for, and if they saw it they may not have the talent to understand what it meant.[/nq]I understand that players who emphasize math and analysis often ignore the human factor of the game, but what I have trouble believing is that this skill is purely an instinct, or intuition, or even a 'sixth sense' that only the "born poker players" possess. Why can this not also be learned? Is there more to it than observing the other player and interpreting his behavior in the context of the hand and the situation? Do less-than-great players fail in reading their opponents because they simply don't "have it" or because they lack experience and overemphasize other more technical elements of the game? Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
John Harkness: [nq:2]What they often miss in their calculation is the posture ... may not have the talent to understand what it meant.[/nq][nq:1]I understand that players who emphasize math and analysis often ignore the human factor of the game, but what I ... because they simply don't "have it" or because they lack experience and overemphasize other more technical elements of the game?[/nq] I don't think you can learn it, but when you're talking about instinct or intuition, you're really talking about calculation and observation that your brain is doing on a subconscious level. Every know and then, I'll see something in a game and as I'm about to call or raise, alarms go off in my head, metaphorically speaking. I've learned to ignore those alarms at my own peril, and it's nothing I can put my finger on. But plainly, my mind has registered something in a play even if I'm not conscious of what it is. John Harkness
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
Daniel Negreanu: [nq:1]I understand that players who emphasize math and analysis often ignore the human factor of the game, but what I ... because they simply don't "have it" or because they lack experience and overemphasize other more technical elements of the game?[/nq]Hmmm... maybe I should clarify further. After reading my post it appears that it may have given off the impression that raw talent is closely linked with tell reading. While it is, there is a lot more to it than that. It's knowing what certain people are capable of, and conversely what they aren't capable of. If you are good at that, then you'll know that certain players in certain situations couldn't possibly be bluffing. Or in other situations, if you know your opponent to be a crafty player, he may be bluffing in a spot where it seems as though he has to have it. Classifying players capabilities is a talent. It's something that CAN be worked on, but the truly great players all have the innate ability to size up a player rather quickly and effectively. Daniel Negreanu www.fullcontactpoker.com Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
eleaticus: [nq:1]I don't think you can learn it, but when you're talking about instinct or intuition, you're really talking about calculation ... on. But plainly, my mind has registered something in a play even if I'm not conscious of what it is.[/nq]I may have the spelling wrong but the ... 1972? thereabouts ... American Association for the Advancement of (the) Science(s)? proceedings had the work of Manfred Klynes ... Kleins? on 'sentic form' which will be an eye opener and extremely relevant. A year ago or so I found him on the internet but it was a highly commercial site with no free science. His stuff was also independently published. eleaticus
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
James L. Hankins: [nq:1]It's knowing what certain people are capable of, and conversely what they aren't capable of. If you are good at ... on, but the truly great players all have the innate ability to size up a player rather quickly and effectively.[/nq]It's not innate ability; it's a skill acquired from life experience, sizing up players countless times, and having the motivation to do it correctly (if you're correct in your assessment, you make money). It's why you'd rather play big bet poker against an accountant rather than a used car salesman.
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
MachineMan: I like what negreanu said about knowing people. After u have played w some people for a half houru get a feel for them as a person. Some personality types just are not capable of certain plays. It just aint in their makeup. I like to play against these types.U can really tell where ur at. And while these people can know all the math in the world, i feel like they r helpless against an aggressive player with a little bit of "people skill". I think hinchcliffe could be a great player from what i saw. Ill say this, u dont want him at ur table in a tourn. * Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.liveactionpoker.com * Free $30 for Pacific Poker at http://www.liveactionpoker.com/free30
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
American Idle: its not just the ability to do so...i mean yes if anyone attempted to they could learn how to do it well enough to profit from it...its the courage to let that feeling overpower logic & in some cases ego that is so hard for people to do, especially w/ a math guy where logic is god and generally speaking the ego is fairly huge.[nq:2]What they often miss in their calculation is the posture ... may not have the talent to understand what it meant.[/nq] [nq:1]I understand that players who emphasize math and analysis often ignore the human factor of the game, but what I ... because they simply don't "have it" or because they lack experience and overemphasize other more technical elements of the game?[/nq] Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
Dave L: [nq:1]It's why you'd rather play big bet poker against an accountant rather than a used car salesman.[/nq]Not if you ask Sammy Farha.
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
Daniel Negreanu: [nq:1]It's not innate ability; it's a skill acquired from life experience, sizing up players countless times, and having the motivation ... you make money). It's why you'd rather play big bet poker against an accountant rather than a used car salesman.[/nq]Extremely well said. That's exactly what I was trying to say, unfortunately I wasn't able to do it as eloquently as you did here. Thank you. Daniel Negreanu www.fullcontactpoker.com Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are to have been moderated by our community.
Show more
| Have a question? People are waiting to help. Interesting stuff |
All RSS Feeds