|
|
#1
11-20-05, 10:19 AM
|
||||
|
||||
If you could take lessons from ONE pro, who would it be?
You only get to pick one and could never learn from another pro, who would you want to teach you their entire game?
I hate to say it becasue i just dislike the guy so much, but for me it would have to be Mike Matusow. He can flat out play. Yours?
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
|
#3
11-20-05, 11:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Phil Ivey...
He is one of the best young players around (5 WSOP bracelets) and he is only 28 and already plays the biggest cash games around. He also has almost no pulse at the table... he could lose a million dollar pot (cash or tourney) and not even show any emotion whatsoever. |
|
#6
11-20-05, 12:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mike Matusow really impressed me with his "You have AK right? And you just folded an Ace right? BOOM 60%" analysis at the WSOP.
I'd still want lessons though from a player who is aggressive but not insane. As much as you have to respect players such as Gus Hanson, Antonio Esfandiari and Lane Flack, I simply wouldnt want to learn from them... they are flat out too reckless (the worst is Todo Leonidas [sp] ) which is why they are all over the place, have huge swings, and are generally inconsistant. I'd much rather learn from Phil Ivey (who is very aggressive but not crazy) or Daniel Negreanu, who is probably the best person in the world at reading hands and making correct decisions. |
|
#7
11-20-05, 01:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Daniel N. No question. I think he is right up there with the other top players (who all would be good to learn from), but I think getting insight into his reading abilities and the fact that he would make it fun to learn, put him at the top of the list IMO.
__________________
Your biggest edge in a HORSE tourney is knowing that the game just changed from Razz to 7 Stud. - BB http://www.talkingpoker.com/forum/blog.php?u=64 |
|
#8
11-20-05, 01:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
For just all around solid play - i might go with Howard Ledered - although i dont think he makes too many fancy moves or mixes it up like the other guys do - he obviously knows how to play
My second choice would be Phil Ivey - once i was more advanced and ready to mix it up a bit.
__________________
"Suffer the pain of discipline or suffer the pain of regret" "Rome wasn't built in a day" |
|
#9
11-20-05, 02:21 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You don't give Toto enough respect.
__________________
|
|
#10
11-20-05, 02:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Probably true... and he has a track record so you have to. I personally think Phil Helmouth's assessment of him was 100% correct though. He does not consistently make finals tables because he is simply too reckless.... not taking anything away from his playing ability -- just not really my style
|
|
#13
11-20-05, 07:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why waste your free lessons on someone who wrote TWO books for you already???
My choice is Negreanu, but Phil Ivey would be a very close second. |
|
#14
11-20-05, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
i'm going with ivey.
i really like negreanu, but i think that ivey is a better player. the reason i have these two at the top of the list is two fold. first, they are both great players. second, they both excel in a wide variety of games and conditions. they are both great tourney players, both can play a bunch of games at a world class level, and they both can make the adjustments between playing full ring, shorthanded, and heads up. i dont think that you could go wrong with either of these two, bu\ i have to go with ivey. |
|
#15
11-20-05, 10:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think there's a lot of choices as to who to pick. I believe who you decide to take lessons from is dependant on your style of play, what game you're playing, weather you're looking for tourney action or ring games, and the ability of the person to teach you the game(s).
If there was one guy I would want to learn all variations of poker, eg. Omaha, Stud, Hi/Low, Triple Draw, Limit and NL Holdem then I would pick Ted Forrest. THe guy is well disciplined in all fields. However, the choices differ significant if you're looking at one particular discipline, and/or if you're looking for ring game or tourney pointers. |
|
#20
11-21-05, 11:43 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nice! That that, Hellmuth!!!
|
|
#21
11-21-05, 11:45 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
She's cute, but not my favorite.
Man, I really need to post my WSOP pics 
|
|
#22
11-21-05, 12:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Because you can't teach shit luck.
__________________
If aces didn't get cracked they would be writing books about me! |
|
#23
11-21-05, 12:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No shit man. Still waiting on Aruba pics too.
Isabelle is the best combination of looks and skill that I could think of. The two combined was the basis of my pick. Jen Harman is cute too and a better player, but looks wise Isabelle>Harman. |
|
#24
11-21-05, 01:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It is a toss up between Ivey and Doyle. Can’t go wrong with either the best of the young guns, and the best of the old guard. Although, most of my game is online, so realistically I should choose the top online pro. Who would that be?
As for the Moneymaker issue, I have a question. I am new here and so I missed the thread for this discussion, if it is out there. My buddy and I always fight about this. He contends that Moneymaker deserves no respect, and is basically a donkey that got lucky. I say that, although the above statement is probably true, even with the luck he played great poker for a few days and he won the big event. Therefore, one is forced to respect him as a player. What do you all think about this? |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
