Coaching discussion on Myth - Page 40

YES, I knew this would end in Baal x Raszi again

why they even talkin price anyways. you charge the most that people will pay and the idea is to have minimal backlog, so that you don't ever feel like u have to coach, so as to keep it fresh and new to the maximum extent possible. the price also serves as a retard filter. i bet that myth loves it when an intelligent businessman who likes the idea of playing poker hits his inbox and snapcalls on the 300 or whatever. all in all it's not a difficult concept to understand.

if he charged 50 his inbox would be perpetually full and he'd be wasting hour after hour of his life giving sample lessons to retards as his frustration slowly grew and he'd soon wonder why he'd been so stupid so as to underprice and thus devalue himself

and, if anything, myth knows what he's worth

all that you end up doing when you attempt to denigrate me maynard is that you end up revealing parts of yourself

and those parts are not pretty

maybe you should put your keyboard in the closet for a little while

in before raszi seen baals mother in a donkey show.

On September 12 2010 23:07 Stim_Abuser wrote: in before raszi seen baals mother in a donkey show.

i still dont believe those things exist.

Kinky Kelly and the Sexy Stud

On September 12 2010 16:08 R_I wrote: Are you saying that it's ok for car companies to lie about including safety features that they actually haven't (or ones that don't work properly) to charge a higher price or sell more cars and then blame the people who buy the cars for not doing proper research when they get fucked up because of the lie? Screw them, don't let morals get in the way right?

Companies lie all the time. They obviously can't claim to have 6 airbags when they only have 5 but companies make other ridiculous claims non stop. Just checking the Sony website they claim "Experience superior sound quality with Sony's new personal audio accessories" they then have on display 4 headphones ranging from $49 to $129. Or going to the Toyota site they claim about the Prius "With the latest in hybrid technology and computerised features, the Toyota Prius will change the way you look at driving". The Sony headphones are shit and the Prius won't change anything about how you look at driving both are lies to a majority of people (if you've never heard decent headphones or driven before then maybe the claims apply to you).

This is the world of marketing and the onus IS on the consumer to do proper research. Companies misrepresent products all the time (hence why there are many legal disputes over false advertising). Going back to the initial example if that car manufacturer could claim 6 airbags and get away with it while only having 5 there are marketers out there who would have no qualms at all about advertising it as such. Feels like I'm back writing marketing essays all over again

But does the fact that it is a free market economy make it unnecessary do discuss whether a product is overpriced or not? I feel like I'm once again just recapping what everyone else have said, but what is wrong with discussing the price on Myth's coaching? Obv there is a ton of shit in this thread, but some people seem to think that just because it is a free market economy we should leave Myth alone to charge whatever he wants.
Obv he can, and should, charge whatever he wants but that is not the same as people discussing whether the coaching is worth the price or not. And I think that making parallells to the car economy is meh (to say the least) because that is a regulated business. Coaching poker is not.

In other news, I also want that mexican icon if baal gets banned but I will be satisfied with a guy in a vikinghelmet or a picture of dusty's luckbox.

On September 13 2010 02:52 rednalluk wrote: what is wrong with discussing the price on Myth's coaching? Obv there is a ton of shit in this thread, but some people seem to think that just because it is a free market economy we should leave Myth alone to charge whatever he wants. Obv he can, and should, charge whatever he wants but that is not the same as people discussing whether the coaching is worth the price or not.

There is nothing wrong with discussing what his coaching is worth, but is there a standard to measure it by? Who is to say what his coaching is worth if not the very people interested in his coaching? I say it is to Myth himself, and those that seek out his service, and no one else.

On September 13 2010 02:38 Funktion wrote: Show nested quote + On September 12 2010 16:08 R_I wrote: Are you saying that it's ok for car companies to lie about including safety features that they actually haven't (or ones that don't work properly) to charge a higher price or sell more cars and then blame the people who buy the cars for not doing proper research when they get fucked up because of the lie? Screw them, don't let morals get in the way right? Companies lie all the time. They obviously can't claim to have 6 airbags when they only have 5 but companies make other ridiculous claims non stop. Just checking the Sony website they claim "Experience superior sound quality with Sony's new personal audio accessories" they then have on display 4 headphones ranging from $49 to $129. Or going to the Toyota site they claim about the Prius "With the latest in hybrid technology and computerised features, the Toyota Prius will change the way you look at driving". The Sony headphones are shit and the Prius won't change anything about how you look at driving both are lies to a majority of people (if you've never heard decent headphones or driven before then maybe the claims apply to you). This is the world of marketing and the onus IS on the consumer to do proper research. Companies misrepresent products all the time (hence why there are many legal disputes over false advertising). Going back to the initial example if that car manufacturer could claim 6 airbags and get away with it while only having 5 there are marketers out there who would have no qualms at all about advertising it as such. Feels like I'm back writing marketing essays all over again

Um just because it's done all the time doesn't mean it's morally right, correct? I don't understand, is it morally wrong to misrepresent or lie about a product that you are selling in the first place?

I think it is, and apparently Myth does too (from his blog post):
"First and foremost, I apologize to all of the poker community for the fact that my CardRunners coaching profile was out-dated and misrepresentative of my current poker play. It said that I had been beating $5/10 and $10/20 online when I made it, which was true at the time, but is no longer true. If there is any person anywhere who has paid me (by the hour) for coaching since April 2008 and wants any type of refund, I will be happy to issue it. However, I am confident that nobody will (primarily because I am still in touch with almost every person I've ever coached). When it was pointed out in Steal City's thread, I changed my CardRunners coaching profile, and it is now up-to-date."

This alone is worth the thread and all the BS imo.

On September 13 2010 03:02 curtinsea wrote: Show nested quote + On September 13 2010 02:52 rednalluk wrote: what is wrong with discussing the price on Myth's coaching? Obv there is a ton of shit in this thread, but some people seem to think that just because it is a free market economy we should leave Myth alone to charge whatever he wants. Obv he can, and should, charge whatever he wants but that is not the same as people discussing whether the coaching is worth the price or not. There is nothing wrong with discussing what his coaching is worth, but is there a standard to measure it by? Who is to say what his coaching is worth if not the very people interested in his coaching? I say it is to Myth himself, and those that seek out his service, and no one else.

It is probably true that the discussion would have had another tone if it was a person seeking opinions before getting coached by Myth. I still dont see the logic in saying that no one can argue about the value of his coaching vs his prize unless they've gotten coaching from him, but I do understand that their opinion will be less true because its mostly speculation but its still an opinion. Obv you have to filter through a lot of shit in this thread to find something good.

My point of this was....that I dont care about Myth's coaching but I saw someone using flawed logic and wanted to win. :S

On September 13 2010 02:38 Funktion wrote:

Opinion based claims =/= lies

On September 12 2010 13:47 nolan wrote:

Smoking bans is a question of one act infringing on the liberties of another. Applying solely free market concepts is obviously not going to make any sense.

The fact of that matter is, coaching is currently an unregulated and ungoverned market entity. Until there is something to assess the coaches and label them as fit or unfit, and at how much per hour they're capable of charging, theres basically nothing you can do about it besides being an alert consumer. Discussing and whining and such accomplishes nothing. If the original goal was to discourage people from hiring myth for $350/hr, I think this thread has long done that.

On September 13 2010 03:06 R_I wrote: Um just because it's done all the time doesn't mean it's morally right, correct? I don't understand, is it morally wrong to misrepresent or lie about a product that you are selling in the first place? I think it is, and apparently Myth does too (from his blog post): "First and foremost, I apologize to all of the poker community for the fact that my CardRunners coaching profile was out-dated and misrepresentative of my current poker play. It said that I had been beating $5/10 and $10/20 online when I made it, which was true at the time, but is no longer true. If there is any person anywhere who has paid me (by the hour) for coaching since April 2008 and wants any type of refund, I will be happy to issue it. However, I am confident that nobody will (primarily because I am still in touch with almost every person I've ever coached). When it was pointed out in Steal City's thread, I changed my CardRunners coaching profile, and it is now up-to-date." This alone is worth the thread and all the BS imo.

It is not really an issue of morals. Because your morals will obviously differ from those of a scammer etc. Myth had some info up that more likely he forgot to ever change and apologised for it. If however he knew the whole time it was misleading and only changed it because he was called out on it then that's a different matter.

The point I was trying to highlight was that because different people DO have different morals the onus is on the consumer to check and re-check information that any company/coach/whatever is advertising. The classic theory of marketing is still today very much alive I hate to tell you.

On September 13 2010 03:45 gawdawaful wrote: Opinion based claims =/= lies

Nice troll.

does anyone have any friends high up in Card Runners. I'm surprised they haven't made a statement already. If this was 2p2 I assume they would have.

On September 13 2010 03:57 Funktion wrote: Show nested quote + On September 13 2010 03:06 R_I wrote: Um just because it's done all the time doesn't mean it's morally right, correct? I don't understand, is it morally wrong to misrepresent or lie about a product that you are selling in the first place? I think it is, and apparently Myth does too (from his blog post): "First and foremost, I apologize to all of the poker community for the fact that my CardRunners coaching profile was out-dated and misrepresentative of my current poker play. It said that I had been beating $5/10 and $10/20 online when I made it, which was true at the time, but is no longer true. If there is any person anywhere who has paid me (by the hour) for coaching since April 2008 and wants any type of refund, I will be happy to issue it. However, I am confident that nobody will (primarily because I am still in touch with almost every person I've ever coached). When it was pointed out in Steal City's thread, I changed my CardRunners coaching profile, and it is now up-to-date." This alone is worth the thread and all the BS imo. It is not really an issue of morals. Because your morals will obviously differ from those of a scammer etc. Myth had some info up that more likely he forgot to ever change and apologised for it. If however he knew the whole time it was misleading and only changed it because he was called out on it then that's a different matter. The point I was trying to highlight was that because different people DO have different morals the onus is on the consumer to check and re-check information that any company/coach/whatever is advertising. The classic theory of marketing is still today very much alive I hate to tell you.

At the very least, the law seems to indicate that mispresenting or lying about goods/services sold is not a "good" thing (at least where I live). I agree with you that people are responsible for checking out what they are thinking of purchasing, and I'm going further and saying that if we can clear up false or misleading info also, all the better. Nevermind whether it was unintentional or not that Myth had misleading information on his coaching profile.

So, I stand by my original reply to Nolan - I think it's good that this thread was made.

why is ball banned?

On September 13 2010 09:06 nicksson wrote: why is ball banned?

probably becuase he talked about raszi's gf
not deserved at all imo
but when you say that kind of things about naz's friends you get banned
its how it works here

Probably because of his post about raszi's gf.
At the same time sawseech who is totally fucked up can write anything he wants.
This is total bullshit.
LP without baal sux.

On September 13 2010 09:44 waga wrote: Probably because of his post about raszi's gf. At the same time sawseech who is totally fucked up can write anything he wants. This is total bullshit. LP without baal sux.

I dont understand, if what baal was saying was a fact, why does he get banned? If its false then sure ban the guy for a week. Can anyone confirm baals statement as true?