Did You Know That …

A few years ago I wrote a column in another publication entitled "Did You Know, That … (Part I)". As the title suggests, I provided an extensive list of tips, views, opinions, and even truths about poker, using the old "Did You Know That …" format. When the column was published, I received a lot more e-mails and other responses than usual. This was possibly because the piece discussed so many different things, and also was a somewhat easy read. I am now planning to write a column like that about once every year to sort of "clean out my closet." By doing so, I will be able to put together several different topics that are important – although maybe not important enough for separate columns – into one single piece. So, what you're reading here can be considered Part II in this ongoing series. OK, so much for the chitchat, let's get down to business. Did you know that …

• there are basically only two important factors in poker: choosing the best game, and then playing your best game?

• all other things may seem important, but are in fact only secondary?

• playing a tight (unimaginative) game may be good enough to beat some of the soft low- and middle-limit games, but not the tougher high-stakes games with good or even expert opposition?

• the people who claim to make (or have made) enormous amounts of money at the poker tables, the ones who like to show off all the money they have, usually don't last for very long?

• conversely, it is the solid day-in and day-out middle-limit grinder who never seems to be doing anything fancy who is likely to last and still be there long after the flashy high roller has busted out for good?

• becoming highly successful in poker is far from easy, but it is in fact quite a bit easier than becoming highly successful in most sports?

• this is because you are up against other professional players in most sports, while in poker, you are facing not just pros, but lots of amateurs, as well?

• some of the best cash-game players in the world don't live in the United States (which would seem "normal"), but in the United Kingdom?

• this is because the top pros in the UK can play in large buy-in pot-limit games that provide a much higher expectation than even the biggest limit games that are offered in the United States?

• even after having played some solid, winning poker for more than six years now, some of my regular opponents still view me as being mostly a lucky player rather than a good or even excellent one?

• there can be no doubt that poker is heading in the right direction?

• this is especially true for Internet poker and tournament poker – which both seem to be booming – mainly because of the involvement of the television networks?

• some of the best and most successful tournament stars are frequently almost broke?

• this is unlike money play, where the best players are almost never out of money?

• a pro who doesn't use every tool available to improve his game is simply not doing everything he can to maximize his edge, and therefore almost certainly cannot be a top player?

• in poker, minimizing your losses is often just as important as maximizing your winnings?

• it's not always perceived that way, because minimizing your losses is simply a lot less glamorous?

• it's a great honor for me to be able to write a regular column for the same magazine that a few top players I look up to also write for?

• it is these same people – who have achieved so much in poker and have had so many great successes – who have helped me lift my game to my current level?

• the closet has been cleaned out rather well, I would say so, this column should be just about done now?

What I have shared with you today are some of my views on tournament poker, on money poker, and on poker in general. I hope you enjoy reading an occasional "light" column like this as a small diversion from my usual material. As always, please feel free to send me any questions or comments you may have. Take care – and good luck.