The Personality of a Pro
Note: These are my opinions based entirely on supposition and my feelings. I may be wrong but I am not entirely sure that I am.
I just finished reading The Professor, the Banker and the Suicide King. The book itself is very good and I like that it doesn’t really take anyone side in this highly contested series of matches. The author makes sure that facts of the winnings and losses are as factual as possible. But the events are not what have caused me to think after reading the book. It is the attitudes of the professional players that have left me with some issues. It seems, according to the book, that a lot of the pros are whiny babies. They seem to have the thought that they are better than anyone else and amateurs cannot beat them, and if they are, there is always a reason of fatigue, alcohol or some other outside reason that they lost.
The winnings and losses that I am referring are the series of heads up matches against Texas banker, Andy Beal. I will not get into the details, I will leave that up to you to read the book or find your information elsewhere. But be warned, the pros will lie about the matches and make it look like they never lost.
My point comes from quotes from some pros, like Johnny Chan, who claim that miracle draws and lucky cards are the only reason that Andy won. This really bothers me. I know that pros usually try to hide big losses and they want to seem unbeatable but this is where I wonder if they are following the wrong path. Why lie about it? You just look like an ass. This is a consistent issue with many poker players; amateur to pro that really bothers me. I see it here at the forum. There are some people who never seem to post that they have faced a loss or if they did so, they won it back very quickly the next day or later in the session. I have personally won a lot and lost a lot, yes my overall record is in the positive but it took a while.
It all comes down to ego. The make up of a poker player seems to be entirely based upon it. At the table they will claim they knew what cards you had (without ever saying it before they are shown) or say, “I knew you were going to re-raise and then I knew he was going to push..blah blah blah.†Why bring this up? Do they realize they just look like an ass? I really like it when I am told what I folded or won without showing and the person couldn’t be more wrong. Ego, it gets in the way.
I am not a perfect player by any means, I make mistakes and lose when I should win and win when I should have lost. We all do it and I don’t hide it. Personally, I am more afraid of a player that can admit mistakes than I am of a player that claims they don’t, they are the ones that are easier to exploit and send on tilt.
Back to the Andy Beal story, after the group won they acted as if they beat this guy down, when it reality only Todd Brunson, Jennifer Harman, Howard Lederer and Phil Ivey ever really had a winning session against the man. Both Brunson and Harman also had big losing sessions as well. But according to a lot of the members of the group, these losses never happened. This man lambasted a lot of these pros. Sure, they won money in the end, only due to the actions of a few people. I don’t know why they seem to brag so much about it.
Basically I think I would have a hard time being friends with a lot of pros. Deceit, lies and exaggerations seem like a foundation to their personalities that I would detest. The game and gambling rules their lives so much that it is their life. Who would want that?
I am happy being an amateur and playing in home games, I just don’t enjoy it as much when someone thinks they are a pro.
I really don’t know what my full point is but it is there somewhere.
I just finished reading The Professor, the Banker and the Suicide King. The book itself is very good and I like that it doesn’t really take anyone side in this highly contested series of matches. The author makes sure that facts of the winnings and losses are as factual as possible. But the events are not what have caused me to think after reading the book. It is the attitudes of the professional players that have left me with some issues. It seems, according to the book, that a lot of the pros are whiny babies. They seem to have the thought that they are better than anyone else and amateurs cannot beat them, and if they are, there is always a reason of fatigue, alcohol or some other outside reason that they lost.
The winnings and losses that I am referring are the series of heads up matches against Texas banker, Andy Beal. I will not get into the details, I will leave that up to you to read the book or find your information elsewhere. But be warned, the pros will lie about the matches and make it look like they never lost.
My point comes from quotes from some pros, like Johnny Chan, who claim that miracle draws and lucky cards are the only reason that Andy won. This really bothers me. I know that pros usually try to hide big losses and they want to seem unbeatable but this is where I wonder if they are following the wrong path. Why lie about it? You just look like an ass. This is a consistent issue with many poker players; amateur to pro that really bothers me. I see it here at the forum. There are some people who never seem to post that they have faced a loss or if they did so, they won it back very quickly the next day or later in the session. I have personally won a lot and lost a lot, yes my overall record is in the positive but it took a while.
It all comes down to ego. The make up of a poker player seems to be entirely based upon it. At the table they will claim they knew what cards you had (without ever saying it before they are shown) or say, “I knew you were going to re-raise and then I knew he was going to push..blah blah blah.†Why bring this up? Do they realize they just look like an ass? I really like it when I am told what I folded or won without showing and the person couldn’t be more wrong. Ego, it gets in the way.
I am not a perfect player by any means, I make mistakes and lose when I should win and win when I should have lost. We all do it and I don’t hide it. Personally, I am more afraid of a player that can admit mistakes than I am of a player that claims they don’t, they are the ones that are easier to exploit and send on tilt.
Back to the Andy Beal story, after the group won they acted as if they beat this guy down, when it reality only Todd Brunson, Jennifer Harman, Howard Lederer and Phil Ivey ever really had a winning session against the man. Both Brunson and Harman also had big losing sessions as well. But according to a lot of the members of the group, these losses never happened. This man lambasted a lot of these pros. Sure, they won money in the end, only due to the actions of a few people. I don’t know why they seem to brag so much about it.
Basically I think I would have a hard time being friends with a lot of pros. Deceit, lies and exaggerations seem like a foundation to their personalities that I would detest. The game and gambling rules their lives so much that it is their life. Who would want that?
I am happy being an amateur and playing in home games, I just don’t enjoy it as much when someone thinks they are a pro.
I really don’t know what my full point is but it is there somewhere.
Comments
.
"He's one of the people who play the famous Texas billionaire(who's a fish, so I don't want to name him). Todd and my brother are the most successful against that guy. Todd and Howard have played these heads-up $50,000 and $100,000 games at the bellagio, where they play off in a corner and it's just them and this billionaire, who really just wants to play against the best in the world. Todd crushes him a lot."
And my point is made again. She wasn't even there. She's an Idiot.