catscradle said:
Yes, I agree he must have had something special besides memory. In some poker games you see few or no cards other than your own, in those cases his photographic memory will not be that significant. I never played gin, but I've played a lot of card games and agree it is much more than remembering cards that have been played or luck.
While it certainly is more than having a photographic memory, having one does in fact give such a ridiculous advantage, it is unbelievable. And it helps in situations that might not at first be apparent.
If you can remember every single hand you ever played against a certain player, or heck, if you can even remember clearly how he has responded every hand within the last 4-5 hours of playing, it is almost like having an open book in front of you when your opponent gets into a pot with you.
I would say I am a fair poker player, and my wife used to be dubious when I would call out an opponent's NL Hold Em hand halfway through the hand. And we're not talking about simple hands to call, like AA, KK, etc.. When I got to be very consistent with a few select players on calling their hands correctly in certain situations, she asked me how I did it.
My answer? I just pay as hard attention as I can to every single play on every single hand.. Being able to effortlessly remember every hand from start to finish from the last 4 hours in poker is an unbeleivably huge advantage. It doesn't matter that you can't see most of the cards. It's the ones you do see that count.
Combine that with an innate logical ability to work out "why" your opponent played the way he did with the hand you saw him show down, and it enables you to extrapolate backwards in a new hand to figure out exactly what he has. And once you do that, the cards YOU have don't matter.
I've read the blogs of a few of the current crop of top professional poker players, and there is a lot of guesswork in certain situations, and sometimes it costs them unexpectedly. From what I heard about Stu, there wasn't much guesswork to his game. He KNEW what you had, he would TELL you what you had, and THEN he would BET INTO you.
You knew he couldn't have you beat every time he bet into you, but how do you call a guy if it's going to commit your whole stack, when he has TOLD you what you hold?
I think Stu won a lot because people were too scared to call him down with medium hands for fear of permanently crippling their chances to win the tournament. They figured it was safer to try to match up with him at the final table, so they would target everyone at the table BUT Stuey.
Russ