by Danhdan » Tue May 16, 2006 4:57 am
Guys, I'm not sure your sample sizes are very big. I came up with the same thoughts as MVP and hard2tel, but then thought, "Just because I hear about some great players who excel at cash games against other great players doesn't necessarily mean that the players who lose are bad at cash games. I think pretty much everyone would lose against Reese, Ivey, Greenstein, Chan, and Brunson constantly because they are the among the best ever.
I'd have to say that each requires a different set of skills, neither is better than the other. Although in a tournament, I think the theory, "In order to live, you have to be willing to die" plays an important part of strategy, and this strategy isn't needed much at all in a cash game...some would say not at all.
As for the winning high stakes cash players, that's why they are at the top...they crush everyone else and can handle the swings when they don't.
"Million dollar play, ten cent finish."
"My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
"Laugh and the world stares at you; cry, and the world stares at you."