Whats up with all the donkeys and so called poker experts, telling people to drop to a level in which they can win constinently. If you can win constinently then you are a very exceptional player, better than most. Even the pros don't win constinently. If you go to Philhelmuth.com, you will read in his blog, where he, himself, sat at a one two no holdem game and lost 528.00 and he is suppose to be "the greatest" poker player alive. A person can play in a 500/ 1000. or a 10/20 or even a small sit and go and lose on any given day. I say if you can win two out of ten tournys or get ahead two out of ten cash games then you are doing good, but for all you poker experts that thinks that a man is down 25k and telling him to drop in level , this is ok, but, he is going to recovery his loses alot quicker staying at this level. He can also recover his loses more quickly playing at different levels with different people at different places, you can't keep playing the same people/players over and over and expect to get any better. My advice is to try different SNG's and different entry level tourneys.

Your retarded.

Staying at a level you can't beat is stupid.

I don't even know where to start.

By "beat consistently", we mean over a statistically significant number of hands, aka the long run. The overall level of play generally increase as one increases the stakse. There are still donkeys that make the games beatable, just less of them. FWIW, Phil Hellmuth (who sucks at cash games anyways) having one losing session at 1/2, is not something extraordinary. Consistent winners have losing sessions all of the time, they just win more than they lose.

And, in reference to your mention of the 25K post, 25K is 25-50 buyins at his level, or 1000+ BBs at his limit game. That is much much more than even the most extreme downswings that consisten winners will deal with. Losing that much, more than likely points to the fact that you have serious holes in your game, and you need to figure out what has happened, and generally, moving down, to soften the blow, financially, is a good idea while you try to plug the leaks.

LJ's law of internet flaming says that any person insulting the intelligence of another online, will make grammatical mistakes that will make them look foolish.

*you're

zach is right, or as right as you can be when responding to something that was so illogical that it was neither correct nor incorrect.

basically, OP says even the best players the world (as exemplified by Phil Hellmuth) cannot beat poker long-term. I'm pretty sure anyone agrees either doesn't play poker, is an American senator.

ouch.

MDG's law of internet flaming says that while the above Second Rule is important, it is secondary to the First Rule of flaming, that you will look even more foolish if you attempt to correct an inside joke, especially one that has been repeated dozens of times in public areas on the forum.

I don't understand why you all cosistently feed these trolls.

RIPOSTE!

His pc = 217? ORLY

I have no avatar. I need a cool avatar.

it's tough not to.


First day at new job.
Feels good to be productive again.
Likely my 50 posts/day days are fading away....

well i guess there is a lot of wannabe poker players out there, that have to insult peoples post because they cannt carry on a reasonable discussion, without insult, of course if they where poker players , then they would have no problem understandingmy post, to all the rude donks out there i am in atlantic city BALLYS oftrn stop by the card room and put your money on my table, and i will openly discuss poker with you. thanks/// TEXASHOLDEM_TIM

Why would you want donks to come see you to talk poker with you? This makes no sense at all.

For more information, reread my first post, and mrdannyg's.

If you would like to discuss poker, please reply to those posts.

As you seemingly just like to get angry on the internet.

I would also work on my spelling/grammar before whining about people who don't want to carry on a conversation with you.

What's so rude about telling you you're wrong, OP? I think maybe it's a misunderstanding of terms. Of course there are consistent winners. Otherwise how would people make a living at playing poker?
Of course even the best players are gonna lose. And if they lose so much as to not be properly rolled for a certain level, then they must face the facts and drop a level.

I think I'm talking to myself.

you do have a cool avatar.

I just got it yesterday, after spending over a year on the board without one.

Im a better cash game player then hellmuth.

It's not even close.

This is how my mom types on instant messenger, except less angry. It's like she can't find the period key.

Women don't like periods

FYP

Damn, I missed my period !

uh oh

Troll attempt or not, I'm an admitted rock when it comes to discussions, so I'll bite.

Better players play at higher limits, and in tourneys with higher buy ins, as those pay out more.

So if you're getting beat at a certain level, dropping a level will thin out the quality of competition and you can work out the missing links in your game that's causing you your losses at the higher levels, while (hopefully) getting you back to a positive cash flow.

As for Hellmuth, maybe he's just a better tourney player than a limit ring player. Yes, there is a difference.

^^^^^^
YSPM