https://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland    Contact            Users: 351 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 16:12

My Coaching

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
Forum Index > Poker Blogs
[vital]Myth    United States. Sep 06 2010 01:52. Posts 12159
This post is being made later than I originally intended. There has been a lot to talk about regarding the thread entitled "This is Wrong" by Steal City, who decided to call into question whether or not my coaching is worth the money I charge for it, which rolled into a lot of other questions directed at me as well. I'll address relevant and public issues in order, and I will not be talking about anything that has to do with my private life or my financial situation.

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.

In that thread, I said that I would log some volume online playing non-rush games so that I could salvage my PTR, which you can find here: http://www.pokertableratings.com/fulltilt-player-search/diagonals. However, I have played far less than I would have liked to. With the release of $2/4 rush, it just hasn't been worth my time to play purely for the sake of having a prettier PTR. Not that that's of any particular value anyway, but it would save me from a lot of flaming. I'm currently on vacation from Sept 1 to Oct 13 and do not have access to my database on my desktop at home, and haven't logged any hands on my laptop since I posted my recent results in the original thread. Things haven't gone well in regular games since then (as you can see with a recent ~3k decline on my PTR), but rush has been great. So, for anyone emotionally invested in seeing me play online and post my results (I don't know why anyone would be anyway), I also apologize for not having logged the volume of hands that I said I would.

As my PTR shows and as everyone knows, including all of my students, I play far more live poker than online poker, and that is what I have done for the past 2 years. There are a variety of reasons for that, and one of the most important is that I have never been good at multi-tabling, regardless of past successes and failures in online poker. I've always played 2-4 tables when I was playing my best, spent a fair amount of time and money donating when playing more than that just due to the fact that I can't do it very well, and been at my sharpest in live games. I've still been playing live throughout this year and doing well. Not nearly as well as I would want to, but well enough that I don't miss online poker much.

I am the only person who plays on Diagonals and Tecknowledgy (my FTP and Stars accounts, respectively). Besides occasionally playing just to sit with some fish at mid-stakes on Stars, Tecknowledgy has been inactive for a long time. I shouldn't even say that I play on that name because nobody does. The action recorded on PTR for that account is from these sporadic fishing sessions as well as some NL50-NL200 play for videos. I've dumped a lot of money on FTP as you can see when you look at my graph on Diagonals. Nobody plays on these names but me, and I do not play on any other names on FTP or Stars.

Now, let's talk about my coaching. People have brought into question two basic concerns: (1) that I am not a winning player and therefore should not be coaching, and (2) that my coaching is overpriced at $350 per hour. Here's what I can say about that.

First, over 90% of all the lessons I give are under my profit-sharing program, for which students do not pay any money upfront and do not pay me unless they are winning under my instruction. If they never succeed, I never get paid. I don't get paid out of their rakeback, bonuses, or income from things like coaching micro-stakes players, ONLY from their direct NLH profits. So if they breakeven and just make rakeback, I get nothing. I absolutely stand by my coaching philosophy and the efficacy of my program, and that's why I offer a deal where people will never pay if they don't win due to my coaching. Furthermore, my long-term coaching program begins with a FREE 60-90 minute interview lesson, so that people can get a sample of how I coach before they decide whether or not to proceed. This is also an opportunity for me to get to know them and find out whether we will be compatible in a coach-student relationship. In this interview session, most students ask me about my PTR and ask about what I am currently doing in terms of poker, and I of course am always upfront and honest about all of that (it's public knowledge anyway, so it's not like I could lie credibly if I wanted to). Nobody who has entered my long-term program has ever been misled about me, or about the way I coach, or about what I play, or about what my strengths and weaknesses are, in any way, ever.

When I do offer by-the-hour coaching, it is ALWAYS issued with a complete refund for anyone who feels that the session did not help them, and that offer is even valid retroactively. Anybody who feels that they did not benefit from paying me by the hour for coaching is welcome to ask for their money back and I will happily refund it. I will cross-post this guarantee on my CR blog as well. I have never had any student ask for any money back, and I will be very surprised if I ever do. I did once have a student cancel the final 2 hours of a 5-hour package, because I had missed two of our originally scheduled lessons, forcing him to re-schedule for me. That was hugely irresponsible on my part (I just forgot to add them to my BlackBerry calendar) and I offered to give him the remaining 2 hours for free, but he declined and instead said he appreciated the first 3 hours but did not want the remaining 2.

As for my $350/hr price, the huge majority of those hours are priced at a discount by the time we agree on a deal. Lessons that are paid by the hour often come from people who just want to get some coaching before they are able to enter my long-term program, and of course I give them a discount if they book those sessions in bulk. Regarding how people find me as a coach, everyone who asks me for coaching does so because they have seen my CR videos, and never for any other reason. Before I joined CR people from LP asked me for coaching because of my posts in LP. Every single person who has gotten coaching from me has done so because they have already had a sample of what I have to say, and they like it and want me to tell them more. When they start working with me, they always ask me what I currently play and other questions about my poker life (during interview sessions), and they always get the exact same answers that everyone in this thread is getting: I play mostly live, I play a lot of tournaments, I coach sometimes over a hundred hours a month, and I play sparingly online, and have had some epic money-dumping sessions in the past couple years online. They know that, they keep coming back, and they are satisfied with both the coaching that I give and the price that I charge.

In fact, yesterday I sent the following survey out to every student that has paid me by the hour in the past 2 years:


  Hey guys,

All of you are the people who have paid for coaching in some way other than purely through profit-sharing, in the past year. I always want to improve my coaching program, and I also want to give the community some testimonials, because my abilities as a poker coach have been called into question by a few people. So, if you could take the time to answer a few questions, that would be very helpful for me and beneficial to the community. You can be brief or detailed, whatever you like.

1. What stakes and game types (6-max, 9-max, RUSH) do you play?
2. Do you feel that you learned important and useful information in your sessions? Can you name one or two things in particular that stuck out for you?
3. Have your sessions made you (or are they currently making you) a better player?
4. In your opinion, has your money been well-invested for my coaching?
5. Is there anything you can suggest that I can do better?

Thanks a lot guys!



If it ever occurs, then for ANY person who answers "no" to question 4, I will refund them ALL of their money AND donate a matching amount of money to a charity chosen by a poll to be conducted in this thread. I haven't gotten any replies yet, but will post them as soon as I do.

0 votes
Facebook Twitter
Eh, I can go a few more orbits in life, before taxes blind me out - PoorUser 

Maynard!   United States. Sep 06 2010 01:55. Posts 4453

1st and tl:dr

:D

Now I really am a busto. Thanks FTP. 

Jubert69   United States. Sep 06 2010 02:24. Posts 3191

I did read. Never lost respect from you Myth, you seem like a stand up guy.


hellokittery   United States. Sep 06 2010 02:29. Posts 1398


  On September 06 2010 01:24 Jubert69 wrote:
I did read. Never lost respect from you Myth, you seem like a stand up guy.


+1


thewh00sel    United States. Sep 06 2010 02:32. Posts 2734

i lost all my respeck for you. Give me ur hulk-protector or suffer the consequences.

A government is the most dangerous threat to man’s rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims. - Ayn Rand 

wobbly_au   Australia. Sep 06 2010 02:43. Posts 6540

I was a student, you charged me 150$/h and we went for 1 hour.

Hey guys,

All of you are the people who have paid for coaching in some way other than purely through profit-sharing, in the past year. I always want to improve my coaching program, and I also want to give the community some testimonials, because my abilities as a poker coach have been called into question by a few people. So, if you could take the time to answer a few questions, that would be very helpful for me and beneficial to the community. You can be brief or detailed, whatever you like.

1. What stakes and game types (6-max, 9-max, RUSH) do you play?

9max

2. Do you feel that you learned important and useful information in your sessions? Can you name one or two things in particular that stuck out for you?

None, you mentioned position which was some what useful

3. Have your sessions made you (or are they currently making you) a better player?

Yes obviously

4. In your opinion, has your money been well-invested for my coaching?

No, and thats why I never went back for #2 lession

5. Is there anything you can suggest that I can do better?

Stop coaching

Thanks a lot guys!

The Last Laugh. 

palak   United States. Sep 06 2010 02:53. Posts 4601

wobbly trolling for the charity donation

dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquarium 

ggplz   Sweden. Sep 06 2010 02:59. Posts 16784

stay classy San Diego

good post myth but you still need to show some kind of results so i guess we'll have to wait for another blog post in the future

if poker is dangerous to them i would rank sports betting as a Kodiak grizzly bear who smells blood after you just threw a javelin into his cub - RaiNKhANLast edit: 06/09/2010 03:00

thumbz555   United States. Sep 06 2010 03:07. Posts 3281

no refunds for trolls

I click buttons. 

terrybunny19240   United States. Sep 06 2010 03:31. Posts 13829

idk if the refund policy is the best thing ever, 150 or 350 bucks is 150 or 350 bucks after all, and I am not sure if it is wise to let people recall their money whenever they want


BigRed0000    United States. Sep 06 2010 03:42. Posts 3554

Wobbly why are you such a douche? You could have made all your points without coming across like a pretentious asshole.


[vital]Myth    United States. Sep 06 2010 03:49. Posts 12159

wobbly, your request for a refund obviously doesn't count and there is a reason why you didn't get an email - nobody has ever or could ever bring into question coaching that i did prior to the time when my CR coaching profile was out-of-date. if anybody feels wronged after the time when my CR profile was out-of-date, then they are entitled to ask for a refund. NOBODY who has absolutely ZERO reason to feel that i misrepresented myself at the time when they asked for coaching has any right to do so

Eh, I can go a few more orbits in life, before taxes blind me out - PoorUser 

wobbly_au   Australia. Sep 06 2010 03:51. Posts 6540


  On September 06 2010 02:42 BigRed0000 wrote:
Wobbly why are you such a douche? You could have made all your points without coming across like a pretentious asshole.



http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=zh...G=Google+%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&meta=

The Last Laugh. 

[vital]Myth    United States. Sep 06 2010 04:07. Posts 12159

also, wobbly got coaching with me once, we continued to talk after that, he met up with me in vegas and we hung out for a fair bit of time well AFTERward

and then i didn't like him as a person and didn't talk to him anymore and obviously that was mutual

and THEN this vendetta against my coaching/reputation came up

just so that everyone's clear on the backstory.

Eh, I can go a few more orbits in life, before taxes blind me out - PoorUser 

mnj   United States. Sep 06 2010 04:16. Posts 3848

:/


mrpav.com   Canada. Sep 06 2010 04:26. Posts 3069

D_zoo is the best coach in the world!

===== mrpav.com ===== 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 04:28. Posts 2537

In the thread you had said you would answer all questions posed to you in the "This is Wrong Thread"

Do you believe you are a winning player online at 3/6?

Most fish believe they are winning players, how can you prove you are a winning player at the highest stakes and game types that you teach. (I think you will agree live and online are two different things)

Would it not be profitable for a 25nl player who has played extensively for many years and is well versed in poker lingo and a good speaker to adapt a coaching profit sharing program? Because of the scientific studied effects of authority and because even if you had selected people and never coached them they would still likely make profit since presumably they were already 100nl winning players or the like... how can you justify that, just because they have to perform for you to make money that you are indeed the cause?

Do you think that the psychological idea of congruence and rationalization could completely bias your student's opinions about your coaching program? For instance, if you take a bunch of fish poker players, if they win money they will very often attribute it to their skill in the game despite semi set ups and preflop run goods et cetera or even just too many hands holding up. (Your students are not fish but they are capable of misjudging the cause of their performace, ie they may perform well because of their already 3 years experience and understanding of the game but may attribute it to your coaching)

If Neilly replicated your coaching program, would you think that would be ethical of him? Why or why not?

How is your situation different?

Can you name a 3/6 or higher online winning player who gives 100+ hours of coaching a month ever?

Would you think it ethical if you were to never play a game of poker again but live off coaching for the next say, 3 years?

Since you have sometimes been teaching a game you do not play and you live play and tournament play are irrelevant, how is your situation different from the last question posed?

How professionally do you believe you have handled the criticism that have been made public of you with the start of my thread?

Why were you being secretive during out AIM conversation and why have you been so slow at providing answers to the community?

Intersango.com intersango.com Last edit: 06/09/2010 04:31

ggplz   Sweden. Sep 06 2010 04:29. Posts 16784


  On September 06 2010 03:26 mrpav.com wrote:
D_zoo is the best coach in the world!



does dzoo still play poker?

if poker is dangerous to them i would rank sports betting as a Kodiak grizzly bear who smells blood after you just threw a javelin into his cub - RaiNKhAN 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 04:32. Posts 2537


  On September 06 2010 03:29 ggplz wrote:
Show nested quote +



does dzoo still play poker?


I think he's a professional poker coach teaching 100 hours a month maybe even, so to answer your question, probably no

not sure about this but i think there he is brought up in the 2p2 thread about predatory coaches...

Intersango.com intersango.com Last edit: 06/09/2010 04:33

BigRed0000    United States. Sep 06 2010 04:40. Posts 3554


  On September 06 2010 02:51 wobbly_au wrote:
Show nested quote +



http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=zh...G=Google+%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&meta=


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pretentious

Synonyms 2. pompous

but I don't care enough about you or internet forums to start an argument. have a good life bro.


Exhilarate   United States. Sep 06 2010 04:47. Posts 5453

wobbly is a faggot


ggplz   Sweden. Sep 06 2010 04:53. Posts 16784

if poker is dangerous to them i would rank sports betting as a Kodiak grizzly bear who smells blood after you just threw a javelin into his cub - RaiNKhANLast edit: 06/09/2010 04:59

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 05:19. Posts 2537

also another question

After the "This is Wrong" thread, PTR indicates that you started playing much more online poker and your PTR increased. After a while though it went back down even further then it was before and you stopped playing. It seems that the cessation of play is more in time with your downswing and perhaps realization that, without intense drive and/or focus you are a loser at the stake instead of the emergence of 2/4 RUSH

Intersango.com intersango.com  

sawseech   Canada. Sep 06 2010 05:39. Posts 3182

it was probably wholly unnecessary for you to post this because the people that matter and who are intelligent enough to make use of the post search functionality of the site already know what it is that you have to offer as a poker coach.

lets go fucking mental la la la la lets go fucking mental lets go fucking mental lala la la 

[vital]Myth    United States. Sep 06 2010 05:41. Posts 12159

On September 06 2010 03:28 Steal City wrote:
In the thread you had said you would answer all questions posed to you in the "This is Wrong Thread"

Do you believe you are a winning player online at 3/6?

Most fish believe they are winning players, how can you prove you are a winning player at the highest stakes and game types that you teach. (I think you will agree live and online are two different things)

- yes i do and i can only prove it by playing and showing it.

Would it not be profitable for a 25nl player who has played extensively for many years and is well versed in poker lingo and a good speaker to adapt a coaching profit sharing program? Because of the scientific studied effects of authority and because even if you had selected people and never coached them they would still likely make profit since presumably they were already 100nl winning players or the like... how can you justify that, just because they have to perform for you to make money that you are indeed the cause?

- gonna be pretty hard for a 25nl player to give people guidance in improving their games, so, no, i don't think clueless players will be able to convincingly say "this is what you need to work on, and this is how you can work on it" without people realizing that they are full of it. a lot of the benefit of my program comes from accountability and guidance in self-management as well, which are not strategic or technical aspects of being a poker player. also, my long-term contract has an exit clause that allows students to quit whenever they want and pro-rate the payment.

Do you think that the psychological idea of congruence and rationalization could completely bias your student's opinions about your coaching program? For instance, if you take a bunch of fish poker players, if they win money they will very often attribute it to their skill in the game despite semi set ups and preflop run goods et cetera or even just too many hands holding up. (Your students are not fish but they are capable of misjudging the cause of their performace, ie they may perform well because of their already 3 years experience and understanding of the game but may attribute it to your coaching)

- of course people can believe things that aren't true, can be misled, and can be manipulated. of course people are biased in their opinions of their friends and people they respect. i can't really help that facet of human nature. i can only continue to do what i do as well as i can do it and let people judge the value of my coaching for themselves and help me improve that coaching as much as i can.

If Neilly replicated your coaching program, would you think that would be ethical of him? Why or why not?

- no. what is unethical about selling something? if people have the information they need (they know neilly's game and coaching philosophy), and he gives them a sample/interview lesson to let them decide for themselves, then he's not being deceiving or misleading. if somebody were to say "neilly's students are stupid for paying for his coaching," then whatever, they are entitled to their opinions and who cares. that doesn't make his practice unethical.

How is your situation different?

- from what?

Can you name a 3/6 or higher online winning player who gives 100+ hours of coaching a month ever?

- no, i don't really keep tabs on the number of hours that anyone coaches, except myself.

Would you think it ethical if you were to never play a game of poker again but live off coaching for the next say, 3 years?

- of course not. it would be wrong of me to tell my students "i have a read on this guy you are playing against" if i don't have that read, but it wouldn't at ALL be wrong of me to tell him "i haven't played in a year and a half but i can see from your database that you are losing a lot of money when faced with 2nd barrels, let's explore your play against c-bets and 2-barrels and find out how we can change your thought process so that you are playing better against them."

Since you have sometimes been teaching a game you do not play and you live play and tournament play are irrelevant, how is your situation different from the last question posed?

- i don't teach games that i don't play.in particular, i do not take share of my students' profits in HU or PLO or anything other than 6max/9max NLH cash and tournaments. and poker is always poker and guidance is always guidance. if i ever have too little experience (say, coaching someone who plays on a euro site) to make a specific read on someone, then i put in extra time working with them to build their reads through HEM, note-taking, etc. i have to spend extra time working with my european students and have them send me videos of their play so that i can have a better idea of just how their games play. that is an impediment at times but there's DEFINITELY no good reason to say that just because i play live, i can't see when somebody has a poor sense of position, a poor work ethic, poor note-taking habits, plays too many pots without the betting lead, etc.

How professionally do you believe you have handled the criticism that have been made public of you with the start of my thread?

- i have apologized for the tardiness of this blog post.

Why were you being secretive during out AIM conversation and why have you been so slow at providing answers to the community?

- i have been slow in responding because i haven't played the volume i said i would play, as i stated in the OP. and refusing to answer unprompted questions from a stranger isn't "being secretive." you are grilling me about my poor results on PTR and i don't have to talk to you about it.

Eh, I can go a few more orbits in life, before taxes blind me out - PoorUser 

[vital]Myth    United States. Sep 06 2010 05:44. Posts 12159


  On September 06 2010 04:19 Steal City wrote:
also another question

After the "This is Wrong" thread, PTR indicates that you started playing much more online poker and your PTR increased. After a while though it went back down even further then it was before and you stopped playing. It seems that the cessation of play is more in time with your downswing and perhaps realization that, without intense drive and/or focus you are a loser at the stake instead of the emergence of 2/4 RUSH

yeah that's not a coincidence, i had a huge losing day and played fairly badly that day, took some time off to play lower and work on my game away from the tables. then 2/4 rush came out and i've primarily played that since then

Eh, I can go a few more orbits in life, before taxes blind me out - PoorUser 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 06:00. Posts 2537

One thing to be made clear when I'm saying you're coaching for games you cannot beat I'm not talking about NL vs PLO of 6m vs HU. I'm talking about stakes. If you coach 3/6 you should be able to beat 3/6. (agree/disagree? seems like agree bc of the 25nl player question) You said you can beat 3/6 but there is verifiable evidence (taking into account possible bad/run volatility) in your PTR which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that you in fact do not beat 3/6... You cannot just make a blanketed statement saying you can do something when there is proof that you cannot do it.


As per the 25nl player question, a 25NL player would have a hard time helping people improve their games(yes) but maybe not making people think he's helping their games. So you just repeated my question in your answer. If you are a 3/6 losing player as your PTR proves you are (if someone has a PTR reverse of yours it proves beyond reasonable doubt that they are a winning player) then is it wrong for you to teach 3/6? Is it wrong for you to make CR vids for teaching 3/6 online?

neilly is a bonafied losing player at ring. If he teaches ring NL he is teaching something he cannot beat. Do you think if he implemented your exact program including the stakes and game types that you teach it would be ethical?

Intersango.com intersango.com  

KeyleK_uk   United Kingdom. Sep 06 2010 06:12. Posts 1687

Steal city you make some decent points, but don't just say the same thing again....

- If a 25 NL player tried to teach someone who knew enough to beat 100NL or w/e it would be pretty clear to see that he's bullshitting in no time at all, come on Steal you have half a brain you can see by the way Myth talks and thinks about poker that he's not a 25 NL player.

- Also, Neilly implements his exact programme? How's he going to do that... If he word for word says the same things as Myth then thats fine... But obviously he's not going to be able to. As I said you made some reasonable points but the last 2 paragraphs are just either plain wrong or with the latter just OT

poker is soooo much easier when you flop sets 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 06:18. Posts 2537


  On September 06 2010 05:12 KeyleK_uk wrote:
Steal city you make some decent points, but don't just say the same thing again....

- If a 25 NL player tried to teach someone who knew enough to beat 100NL or w/e it would be pretty clear to see that he's bullshitting in no time at all, come on Steal you have half a brain you can see by the way Myth talks and thinks about poker that he's not a 25 NL player.

- Also, Neilly implements his exact programme? How's he going to do that... If he word for word says the same things as Myth then thats fine... But obviously he's not going to be able to. As I said you made some reasonable points but the last 2 paragraphs are just either plain wrong or with the latter just OT




I know some 25nl player who can really talk the talk. I see proof that myth is a losing 3/6 player so i don't get it, just because he is eloquent with words or something he can teach a limit he cannot beat? I am not sure what you are saying KeyleK_uk?

FYI, I'm obviously using extreme examples to prove my point but yes, there are many people like neilly who have been playing for a long time and having a discussion with them from a standpoint that they are an authority figure it can be very hard to judge what limit someone plays... especially if say myth can beat 1/2, it won't be too hard for him to act like he can beat 3/6 even if he can't. I know a few people who at least barely beat 50nl but could really talk the talk and sound more poker versed, even to a high stakes player than make 1/2 players... and i'm being conservative in my figures here

Intersango.com intersango.com  

LemOn[5thF]   Czech Republic. Sep 06 2010 06:26. Posts 15163

Steal City I have to disagree with you.. Being a good coach is different from being a good player.

Look at Tommy Angelo... The dude plays with a fragment of money of the people he teaches, yet it doesn't stop people like Phil Galfond to give him $10k for a week of coaching and benefit from it hugely...

Myth obviously doesn't have the drive and discipline to beat 3/6+ online over a decent sample (Don't lie to yourself Myth, there is no way you could play 240k+ hands/3months at those stakes and have a 3BB/100+ winrate), but that doesn't mean at all his advice on position, ranges and various concepts will not help tremendously to people that do have the drive and discipline which he lacks, and it absolutely doesn't imply that he is not a good teacher.

Hell, even Neilly would surely have a lot to give, even in cash games to a player who doesn't go on rampage degen tilts that purge his BR like Neilly does and always will.


If you simplify this so much you would basically say that all winners would make good coaches, and that is absolutely not the case.

93% Sure! Last edit: 06/09/2010 06:30

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 06:39. Posts 2537


  On September 06 2010 05:26 LemOn[5thF] wrote:
Steal City I have to disagree with you.. Being a good coach is different from being a good player.

Look at Tommy Angelo... The dude plays with a fragment of money of the people he teaches, yet it doesn't stop people like Phil Galfond to give him $10k for a week of coaching and benefit from it hugely...

Myth obviously doesn't have the drive and discipline to beat 3/6+ online over a decent sample (Don't lie to yourself Myth, there is no way you could play 240k+ hands/3months at those stakes and have a 3BB/100+ winrate), but that doesn't mean at all his advice on position, ranges and various concepts will not help tremendously to people that do have the drive and discipline which he lacks, and it absolutely doesn't imply that he is not a good teacher.

Hell, even Neilly would surely have a lot to give, even in cash games to a player who doesn't go on rampage degen tilts that purge his BR like Neilly does and always will.


If you simplify this so much you would basically say that all winners would make good coaches, and that is absolutely not the case.



i didn't say all winners would make good coaches, just that it should be a prerequisite. By ur logic all losers, might make a good coach if in one aspect they are better than you. You can get a vocal music coach to teach you how to breathe while playing poker.

Myth is teaching poker strategy from his own accounts. He's not teaching relaxation methods or things like Tommy Angelo. Tommy Angelo isn't a poker coach, he's a life coach or a focus coach and he advertises himself that way. (from what i know*)

Intersango.com intersango.com Last edit: 06/09/2010 06:41

LemOn[5thF]   Czech Republic. Sep 06 2010 06:51. Posts 15163


  On September 06 2010 05:39 Steal City wrote:
Show nested quote +



i didn't say all winners would make good coaches, just that it should be a prerequisite. By ur logic all losers, might make a good coach if in one aspect they are better than you. You can get a vocal music coach to teach you how to breathe while playing poker.

Myth is teaching poker strategy from his own accounts. He's not teaching relaxation methods or things like Tommy Angelo. Tommy Angelo isn't a poker coach, he's a life coach or a focus coach and he advertises himself that way. (from what i know*)

But how does it matter - If it is not taking enough breaks, being results oriented, not sitting up straight or raising too wide UTG and 3betting too much oop...Those are all individual aspects of the game, and the success of the player equals the sum of them all.

If Myth is good at everything except tilt control and discipline to play consistently over large samples, and only these two things make him a loser then surely he can give a lot to his students, who do have the balls to sit down, play and focus on every pot over extended periods of time instead of posting on the forums and whining and tilting half their online BR in one session like Myth did.

And yes, I can't see why a loser that is better than me in one aspect of the game wouldn't make a good coach, IN THAT ONE ASPECT OF THE GAME.

Edit: It seems that you think of a coach as a person who teaches you everything from A to B and you should ultimately transform into your coach's image. Thats the case for NL2 coaches, but when you get to the levels Myth (or Mourinho, or Hitchcock, or whatever coaches are in the weird US sports) teaches, it is more about keeping the players overall play and helping him to work only on specific aspects that he could improve, and better yet, to challenge him and provide alternatives so that the player can realize them and develop himself.

Sports coaches are fat and can't do shit in the sports they train, Myth is lazy and doesn't have proper tilt control and can't do shit by grinder standards, but these guys still can make great teachers.

93% Sure! Last edit: 06/09/2010 07:03

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 07:27. Posts 2537

Lemon, the comment you quoted can be restated as a reply to your reply to it... but this isn't an endless loop, you seem to have missed my point

Intersango.com intersango.com  

LemOn[5thF]   Czech Republic. Sep 06 2010 07:28. Posts 15163


  On September 06 2010 06:27 Steal City wrote:
Lemon, the comment you quoted can be restated as a reply to your reply to it... but this isn't an endless loop, you seem to have missed my point


So what is your point, I don't get it. And Tommy is a poker coach indeed and betting strategy and tilt control are all part of poker btw

93% Sure! Last edit: 06/09/2010 07:31

longple    Sweden. Sep 06 2010 07:35. Posts 4472

why is the only argument for the ppl on the myth side like "a sport coach dont need to be good at the sport he coaches so a pokercoach dosnt need to be good either"

its like, not even close to being the same thing dudes


morph1   Sierra Leone. Sep 06 2010 07:42. Posts 2352

[ ] ptr is 100% accurate
[x] myth is beating 3/6 on Diagonals PTR (just look at Diagonals's Results by Game Stake, and use simple math)
[ ] myth has a big sample
[?] myth is a good coach (I guess on this one, only his students can answer)

who gives a fuck anyway...?

Always Look On The Bright Side of Life 

morph1   Sierra Leone. Sep 06 2010 07:44. Posts 2352

steal city vs myth HU4ROLZ 321 FIGH GOGOGOGOGOGO

Always Look On The Bright Side of Life 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 07:50. Posts 2537


  On September 06 2010 06:42 morph1 wrote:
[ ] ptr is 100% accurate
[x] myth is beating 3/6 on Diagonals PTR (just look at Diagonals's Results by Game Stake, and use simple math)
[ ] myth has a big sample
[?] myth is a good coach (I guess on this one, only his students can answer)

who gives a fuck anyway...?



[x] PTR is incredibly accurate and even a sample of 100k+ hands which are randomly selected will do the justice so it wouldn't matter if PTR only tracked 50% of hands as long as it doesn't have a bias when tracking hands which is doesn't
[x] he is losing at 1/2 and 2/4, statistically speaking he is losing at the limits he plays, of which 3/6 is the highest
[x] myth has a big enough sample to statistically prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is losing at the stakes he coaches

Intersango.com intersango.com  

LemOn[5thF]   Czech Republic. Sep 06 2010 07:57. Posts 15163

It seems that Steal City wants some free coaching -.-

Why don't you have a session with Myth so that he can prove his point to you (Obv recorded and shared with LP)

93% Sure! Last edit: 06/09/2010 08:06

bigredhoss   Cook Islands. Sep 06 2010 08:07. Posts 8646


  On September 06 2010 06:50 Steal City wrote:
Show nested quote +



[x] PTR is incredibly accurate and even a sample of 100k+ hands which are randomly selected will do the justice so it wouldn't matter if PTR only tracked 50% of hands as long as it doesn't have a bias when tracking hands which is doesn't
[x] he is losing at 1/2 and 2/4, statistically speaking he is losing at the limits he plays, of which 3/6 is the highest
[x] myth has a big enough sample to statistically prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is losing at the stakes he coaches


i just glanced at Diagonals ptr but it looks like overall he's up money at 3/6 and under...?

Truck-Crash Life 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 09:15. Posts 2537


  On September 06 2010 07:07 bigredhoss wrote:
Show nested quote +



i just glanced at Diagonals ptr but it looks like overall he's up money at 3/6 and under...?



u seem to not understand my sentence. It doesn't make sense for him to be a winning 3/6 player but a losing 1/2 and 2/4 player no... the statistical proof I did showing that he has a losing track record was according to all his PTR tracked hands of which there are 100K+... this shows that he has a losing sample which is not losing merely because of volatility. Since he is a losing player at the amalgamated limits and 3/6 is the highest of those limits it would suggest that if he played 100k hands of 3/6 he would likely be losing unless he plays 3/6 differently then he plays 1/2 and 2/4 and so much better that it even overshadows the fact that 3/6 is harder to beat

Intersango.com intersango.com  

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 09:20. Posts 2537

by your logic bigred, he should be allowed to teach 3/6 but not 1/2 or 2/4

Someone can do an independent statistical analysis of the various limits and see what the % chance that volatility has caused him to have a winning 3/6 sample and a losing 1/2 and 2/4 sample.

What i did was statistical analysis based on his entire sample of which 3/6 was the highest showing that, unless he plays 3/6 much much better than he plays 1/2 and 2/4 he is a losing 3/6 player with a biased sample.

Intersango.com intersango.com  

longple    Sweden. Sep 06 2010 09:22. Posts 4472


  On September 06 2010 08:15 Steal City wrote:
Show nested quote +



u seem to not understand my sentence. It doesn't make sense for him to be a winning 3/6 player but a losing 1/2 and 2/4 player no... the statistical proof I did showing that he has a losing track record was according to all his PTR tracked hands of which there are 100K+... this shows that he has a losing sample which is not losing merely because of volatility. Since he is a losing player at the amalgamated limits and 3/6 is the highest of those limits it would suggest that if he played 100k hands of 3/6 he would likely be losing unless he plays 3/6 differently then he plays 1/2 and 2/4 and so much better that it even overshadows the fact that 3/6 is harder to beat




samplesize though

like my graph from stars, am i a losing or winning nl100 player? (i play profitably on 2/4 on other networks now)



myth just gonna have to put down volume if hes gonna want to try and prove it, if he dosnt care or his students dosnt care its nothing more to discuss imo. if he thinks he is good enough to coach at 3/6 and his students thinks so to and they are aware of all the facts, whats the problemoooooo?

 Last edit: 06/09/2010 09:23

bigredhoss   Cook Islands. Sep 06 2010 09:44. Posts 8646


  On September 06 2010 08:15 Steal City wrote:
Show nested quote +



u seem to not understand my sentence. It doesn't make sense for him to be a winning 3/6 player but a losing 1/2 and 2/4 player no... the statistical proof I did showing that he has a losing track record was according to all his PTR tracked hands of which there are 100K+... this shows that he has a losing sample which is not losing merely because of volatility. Since he is a losing player at the amalgamated limits and 3/6 is the highest of those limits it would suggest that if he played 100k hands of 3/6 he would likely be losing unless he plays 3/6 differently then he plays 1/2 and 2/4 and so much better that it even overshadows the fact that 3/6 is harder to beat



this doesn't make sense to me.

if you look at the "almagamation" of limits 3/6 and under on his PTR he is up overall. it sounds like you're saying the opposite. what am i not understanding?

Truck-Crash Life 

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 09:45. Posts 2537

crazy graph, can you give us the graph in BBs? is it just 100nl in which case ur running 2bb/100 if i calculated it right under EV. Also what you are doing is the reverse of the survivorship bias... but the same princible (just we're talking about non survivors in a way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias


The statistical analysis provided the chance that it was something like 1/500 that he was a winning player at those limits. That means 1 out of every 500 winning players players will be able to provide such a sample. More over, if we look for it in our records and we've played say 2 million hands we can, provide what, 20/500 chance a graph like his. The chance that he was a solid winner was even less et cetera. You did not post a regular graph (ie we are only looking at an extreme)... where still you are basically a breakeven player (certainly with rake back)

Intersango.com intersango.com  

Steal City   United States. Sep 06 2010 09:51. Posts 2537

to put it in a simpler way, there's a reason why in the scientific method you make the hypothesis before you do the testing

and the people who do the testing and then make up the hypothesis are victims to the "correlation does not imply causality" thing

anyway, because this is a burried blog post, all further posts should be here

http://www.liquidpoker.net/poker-foru...last/Coaching_discussion_on_Myth.html

Intersango.com intersango.com  

longple    Sweden. Sep 06 2010 09:51. Posts 4472


  On September 06 2010 08:45 Steal City wrote:
crazy graph, can you give us the graph in BBs? is it just 100nl in which case ur running 2bb/100 if i calculated it right under EV. Also what you are doing is the reverse of the survivorship bias... but the same princible (just we're talking about non survivors in a way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias


The statistical analysis provided the chance that it was something like 1/500 that he was a winning player at those limits. That means 1 out of every 500 winning players players will be able to provide such a sample. More over, if we look for it in our records and we've played say 2 million hands we can, provide what, 20/500 chance a graph like his. The chance that he was a solid winner was even less et cetera. You did not post a regular graph (ie we are only looking at an extreme)... where still you are basically a breakeven player (certainly with rake back)




its like 100k hands nl50
450k hands nl100 and rest is some 25nl, mostly 200nl like 100k hands, and some nl400

bb graph:
+ Show Spoiler +



so its actually more buy ins then if it was strictly 16k$ on 100nl under EV

 Last edit: 06/09/2010 09:56

Perisie   . Sep 06 2010 09:55. Posts 801

ahhh -$ after 600,000 hands i feel faint~


longple    Sweden. Sep 06 2010 09:58. Posts 4472


  On September 06 2010 08:55 Perisie wrote:
ahhh -$ after 600,000 hands i feel faint~



ist all good, up little more then 30k$ this summer since i left stars

enough about the graph though, back to myth



also


  On September 06 2010 08:53 Steal City wrote:
to respond to longple in myth's blog, you are working with a sample size of maybe 10s of thousands of players who use hold em manager or PT3 or w/e, they all play many many many



i dont understand anything from this can u reformulate, or reword or w/e the english word for explaining with other words is

 Last edit: 06/09/2010 10:02

whamm!   Albania. Sep 06 2010 10:35. Posts 11625

stop making fun of 25nl players lol


Xervean   United States. Sep 06 2010 11:47. Posts 682

Don't think anyone has mentioned the fact that he dropped 15k in 1 day (tilting?) playing 10/20. If not for this he would have a slightly positive account. Still doesn't account for the 1/2 or 2/4 samples.. but it wouldn't look quite as bad. Also because he is a winner over 22k hands at 3/6 and a loser at 1/2 over 27k that clearly isn't enough information to determine if he is a winning player at either limit. Highly subjective to variance obviously.

On the screenshot you posted here donald http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/5449/2010sofar.jpg It shows you being a LOSING PLAYER at .50/1 over 33k hands and a loser at 50nl over 14k. Now this is obviously just variance because your crushing highstakes over even larger samples. All I am saying is he probably doesn't have enough hands to definitively show if he is a winner or loser.


Baalim   Mexico. Sep 06 2010 13:10. Posts 34246

being an espectator in this kind of things is totally new to me :D, i like it...

im surprised myth cant beat midstakes, probably due to his game deteriorating for mostly playing live

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Baalim   Mexico. Sep 06 2010 13:12. Posts 34246

Wobbly changed into a totally different person, he was like the kindest kid ever and then turned into somebody as abrasive as myself but just like me he usually speaks the truth in a very ineffective way.

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Rekrul   United States. Sep 06 2010 13:26. Posts 3338

i think wobbly should go back to posting pics of him and his gf, it was more fun back then

LOvEDoM says: ALL IN WAR 

wobbly_au   Australia. Sep 06 2010 13:58. Posts 6540


  On September 06 2010 05:12 KeyleK_uk wrote:
Steal city you make some decent points, but don't just say the same thing again....

- If a 25 NL player tried to teach someone who knew enough to beat 100NL or w/e it would be pretty clear to see that he's bullshitting in no time at all, come on Steal you have half a brain you can see by the way Myth talks and thinks about poker that he's not a 25 NL player.

- Also, Neilly implements his exact programme? How's he going to do that... If he word for word says the same things as Myth then thats fine... But obviously he's not going to be able to. As I said you made some reasonable points but the last 2 paragraphs are just either plain wrong or with the latter just OT



I can go record in saying i'll take bets on neilly to beat myth in HU or Ring lol.

Also steal is pretty spot on about everything

The Last Laugh. 

wobbly_au   Australia. Sep 06 2010 14:27. Posts 6540


  On September 06 2010 07:07 bigredhoss wrote:
Show nested quote +



i just glanced at Diagonals ptr but it looks like overall he's up money at 3/6 and under...?



and im a winner at 50/100

The Last Laugh. 

wobbly_au   Australia. Sep 06 2010 14:40. Posts 6540


  On September 06 2010 12:12 Baal wrote:
Wobbly changed into a totally different person, he was like the kindest kid ever and then turned into somebody as abrasive as myself but just like me he usually speaks the truth in a very ineffective way.



poker world changes people, cant be a pussy in a world this harsh

The Last Laugh. 

longple    Sweden. Sep 06 2010 19:50. Posts 4472


  On September 06 2010 13:40 wobbly_au wrote:
Show nested quote +



poker world changes people, cant be a pussy in a world this harsh


toughguy huh?


Bejamin1   Canada. Sep 07 2010 03:26. Posts 7042

Steal City makes one very significant point in his posts. Myth correct me if I'm wrong on this since I'm too lazy to backtrack and source to some of the old original threads where you posted requirements for potential students.

Facts:
1. Myth accepts students that generally play a minimum of 1/2.
2. These students are either slight losers, break-even, or maybe the slightest of winners.
3. Students in the profit-sharing program receive one lesson per month, or was it two? I don't recall.
4. The students Myth selects are competent poker players to begin with.
5. These students selected want to learn and get better at poker. The desire to learn and get better is shown in their seeking of coaching and interest in others points of view on the game.


Myth I'll say bluntly what I think. I think the long-term students you end up selecting would probably succeed with or without your help. I think that if you take a break-even player online at 1/2 or 2/4 and have them play at a pace of 500k hands a year that at some point during that 500k hand stretch they will likely run hot or run ice cold. If they run ice cold you don't make any money. If however they run hot then you net your 10k in profit sharing regardless of whether they actually benefited from your coaching or not. Arranging such a long-term situation is massively beneficial for you rather than for the student. Whether your coaching helps or not if you have players that are dedicated to learning and getting better they will very likely see improvement over the course of a year especially if they are putting in solid and consistent volume on the tables.

So what are the main reasons your students sometimes succeed at achieving their goals in poker?

A) The fact that they receive advice on MSN & 2 hours of coaching sessions per month

OR

B) The fact that these players put in significant volume online, are working hard to improve at poker on a consistent basis, care about improving and seeking others points of view, are generally competent poker players to begin with, and lastly that over a length of time like 1-2 years most players will improve if they're doing all of the things previously mentioned.

I'm not saying that your coaching isn't helpful or beneficial. However I do think the deck is stacked in your favour for a payoff. The students are likely to succeed on the merits of their own efforts to improve their game and get better at poker. Using such a long-time frame virtually guarantees these players will improve if they continue to try and do so for the full length of time. Myth you essentially stand to benefit from people becoming your students whether your coaching was valuable or not.

The only fix for this situation would be to reduce the term of these profit-sharing contracts. Give the students one lesson a week for 2 months. Same profit line of up to 10k within the two month period. If you can help these people achieve these results in such a short term you've likely helped them a lot. If you're taking 10k from people over the course of a year it's less likely that your coaching was the reason for their success. Running hot variance or simple hard work on the students part are far larger contributing factors when you stretch out the time like that.

Sorry dude he Jason Bourned me. -Johnny DramaLast edit: 07/09/2010 03:29

Artoo_Detoo   United States. Sep 08 2010 18:30. Posts 506


  On September 06 2010 13:40 wobbly_au wrote:
Show nested quote +



poker world changes people, cant be a pussy in a world this harsh


B.S. son. I know crap about poker, but I know that two of the best players in the world are Phil Ivey and Tom Dwan. Neither of them is a douche like you. Your peers on here play a lot of poker. Most of them are not douches like you. Poker world does not change people, you just chose to change yourself. Don't blame your own choices on extraneous factors, you are a bastard because you chose to be one.


 



Poker Streams

















Copyright © 2024. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap