Gambler vs non gambler

cleary said:
Eric, like I said before... this guy wont quit. This sh*t on az is just the tip of the iceberg. He's been barking at me for months on facebook and in chatrooms. He has no intentions of playing. He also has trouble reading and with reading comprehension. Everything I've posted has went over his head. He takes 2 or 3 words out of a post and runs with it. I just want him to quit posting. I don't even want to play him... like someone said, its a no win situation.
Click to expand...

Dude, it's pretty clear. To everybody.

You've made reasonable offers to play, tried to make it happen, but at the end of the day, you're just dealing wiht someone that smokes crack.

Kinda like deja vu all over again, for me (getting woofed at/stalked by JBnutCases to play 10 ball) :)


Eric
 
The better player should give weight. If you place better in tournaments, your a better player. Just because someone may gamble more doesn't mean that they are better at it.
 
Not so "Dorabelle"...Just cause somebody "places" higher in tournaments does not necessarily mean they are the better "player". It means they are the better "tournament player". I can think of a large number of "players" who were never famous for "high tournament finishes" but would offer the tournament "winners" sizable spots (weight) after the tournament was over. That is not to say that people who finish well in a tournament don't play well...of course they do, but Ive seen may tournament "Champions" go bust getting weight from a guy that went "2 and out". Tournaments by their design are generally "short" and "cheap" (with no risk factor short of your ALREADY paid entry fee). Gambling "can" go on for a long time and put a "players" skill, mental toughness, physical conditioning and character to the complete "test"....plus if you loose gambling your opponent will generally give you the same "game" on your next meeting (say..."tomorrow night 7:00 PM and please bring more MONEY"). So all I'm saying is be careful "crediting" your tournament or league champion with being the "best around"...they may not be.
 
Red Shoes said:
Not so "Dorabelle"...Just cause somebody "places" higher in tournaments does not necessarily mean they are the better "player". It means they are the better "tournament player". I can think of a large number of "players" who were never famous for "high tournament finishes" but would offer the tournament "winners" sizable spots (weight) after the tournament was over. That is not to say that people who finish well in a tournament don't play well...of course they do, but Ive seen may tournament "Champions" go bust getting weight from a guy that went "2 and out". Tournaments by their design are generally "short" and "cheap" (with no risk factor short of your ALREADY paid entry fee). Gambling "can" go on for a long time and put a "players" skill, mental toughness, physical conditioning and character to the complete "test"....plus if you loose gambling your opponent will generally give you the same "game" on your next meeting (say..."tomorrow night 7:00 PM and please bring more MONEY"). So all I'm saying is be careful "crediting" your tournament or league champion with being the "best around"...they may not be.
Click to expand...

How about when both players are ranked C?
 
ignomirello said:
Gambler vs non gambler

lets say they are pretty even in play.

But # 1 is a tournament player who just enjoys playing.

# 2 is a gambler

Who has the advantage & by how many games?

Lets say they race to 15.

Who would win & by what score?

Yes the gambler would be playing for money Probably trying to high roll him.
Click to expand...

dude leave it alone no 1 cares
 
ignomirello said:
Gambler vs non gambler

lets say they are pretty even in play.

But # 1 is a tournament player who just enjoys playing.

# 2 is a gambler

Who has the advantage & by how many games?

Lets say they race to 15.

Who would win & by what score?

Yes the gambler would be playing for money Probably trying to high roll him.
Click to expand...
The guy with the 2pc cue would win..:grin-square:
 
ignomirello said:
Gambler vs non gambler
lets say they are pretty even in play.
But # 1 is a tournament player who just enjoys playing.
# 2 is a gambler
Who has the advantage & by how many games?
Lets say they race to 15.
Who would win & by what score?
Yes the gambler would be playing for money Probably trying to high roll him.
Click to expand...

Are you an adult?

Are you capable of making your own decisions?

Can't you just decide to gamble or not with someone, and not piss and moan endlessly about it on a public forum?

If I decide to gamble with someone I never complain if I lose. It was my decision to gamble.

Don't gamble what you aren't willing to lose. If you think you had a lock and didn't, you screwed up. Take it like a man. And if you think the other guy has a lot, be lucky you aren't gambling with him and STFU.
 
ignomirello said:
physical? like this? --->http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoudYNeVn5E

lol

Changing the rules again Now he wants a tight table LOL

Next he will want all the breaks! and make me shoot behind my back.

Cleary Don't show all your friends your a coward. At least you have your buddies trying to help you get you out of the mess you put yourself in.

By the way if you want to get physical Play with Mary & her 4 sisters.
Click to expand...

Tony,

Having read these threads, I have to believe that you would have to be either mentally disabled or insane to really believe the above quote.

Or you are just trying your damnedest to be a pain in the ass.

Either way, like another poster has said, I never really had a good idea what a nit was until I read your posts.

I award full points to Cleary, and may god have mercy on your soul.
 
Put_upor_shutup said:
What The Saw is trying to say is that with the derby coming up..Chris Bartram would like to play some of the top pros with 5 or 6 on the wire to 15..Let the offers ring..The phone lines are open..Please contact The Saw with any further offers...Thank you


This message had been brought to you and funded by the organization known as The Leaders of the Underworld...
Click to expand...

Word..................
 
In a race to 15 I give it to the tournament player. In a long set I give it to the gambler.
 
shinobi said:
Are you an adult?

Are you capable of making your own decisions?

Can't you just decide to gamble or not with someone, and not piss and moan endlessly about it on a public forum?

If I decide to gamble with someone I never complain if I lose. It was my decision to gamble.

Don't gamble what you aren't willing to lose. If you think you had a lock and didn't, you screwed up. Take it like a man. And if you think the other guy has a lot, be lucky you aren't gambling with him and STFU.
Click to expand...

I concur
I have already forgotten about that thread. Now I know why this thread was posted.
 
The tournament player would win, because the lockjaw skills of the gambler would be of little use.
 
For the love of god man reach in your wallet and get some heart!

If nothing else you have to pay to see his cards.
 
ignomirello said:
Gambler vs non gambler

lets say they are pretty even in play.

But # 1 is a tournament player who just enjoys playing.

# 2 is a gambler

Who has the advantage & by how many games?

Lets say they race to 15.

Who would win & by what score?

Yes the gambler would be playing for money Probably trying to high roll him.
Click to expand...

After how long of playing like this??

This is a good question. I think if two players come up, and they are both equal.... one gambles -- the other doesn't..... after a year the gambler will out and out ROB the non gambler in tournaments AND gambling, and overall playing ability. That is just the way it is. If you don't like it, I don't know what to say.
 
DGHustles said:
way to abstract to answer imo. Ralph Soquet does not gamble ever, but I will take him over quite a few top pros.
Click to expand...

If ralph laid down 10k against a hardened gambler, well, i guess we'll never know, but it would be a joke. you have to ask yourself, why doesn't he do it? that answers are truly very obvious.
 
The Chinchilla said:
If ralph laid down 10k against a hardened gambler, well, i guess we'll never know, but it would be a joke. you have to ask yourself, why doesn't he do it? that answers are truly very obvious.
Click to expand...

Ralf would rob the world if he gambled. He plays smarter and more exact than anyone on earth. Shane and Orcollo would be STUCk playing Ralf. But he doesnt gamble.

A gambler doesn't have any advantage. Tournaments are so much harder. I don't play in many tournaments cause I don't have the time... but I feel way more pressure in a tournament than gambling.
 
Dorabelle....What if they are both "C" players?....Well, what might be considered an "advantage" for the gambler would still translate to an "advantage" even at a "C" level. Also there has been talk about "comfort level" of a bet. "IF" somebody doesn't gamble, the minute a wager is made on the outcome...they are out of their "comfort level". Now "if" they find out they can focus and play with the same ability as they play with "bragging rights pool", then they are "rare". Most "funzy" players execution level suffers when the "bet is on". The same is true for "comfort level" (i.e. $20 player betting $200). To become a "high stakes pool player"....one has to do it in "stages". You must be a good $10 player before you become a good $50 player (and on up the ladder). If you try to skip too many "rungs" (i.e. go from $10 to $200), your execution level will "suffer" til you get "used to" betting $200. Most (NOT ALL THOUGH) players that "high roll" are not interested in actually "playing". Rather than declining a game...they "high roll" the opponent. I have seen it "backfire" on some over the years, when the opponent "agrees". Now instead of just saying "no" to a $20 game, you have just "high rolled" yourself into a $500 game. Just let it be said that MONEY can be used to induce pressure on a player to make their "game" suffer. For more MONEY the pockets can get smaller. For enough MONEY, you can make the pockets actually "DISAPPEAR" (for you or them). I assume most of us play because we enjoy the game. A bet (wager) can increase the enjoyment of the game. If you bet, keep it to a level that you can "handle" if you loose. So in closing....the "gambler" will generally prevail against the "non-gambler" of the same "skill" level AND the "high stakes gambler" will prevail against the "low stakes gambler" (skill levels being equal).
 
Ted if I follow your reasoning the tournament player that is a millionaire should have a huge advantage as the amount bet would be comfortable for him compared to the seasoned gambler playing on their own money. Do you agree?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top