A perennial argument from the old guard of poker, like Doyle Brunson and the ilk of traditional Texas traveling gamblers, is that younger players play too aggressively and crazy to beat them at poker. They are often right in their stereotype, but they fail to realize that often these young players are calculating, mathematically oriented gamblers, who push thinner and thinner in an attempt to beat each other.
There is something to be said for a tight, conservative poker strategy. It often books more winning sessions, months, and years than a looser style, which can have wild variance. But in the same sentence, one must also admit that the net winnings of the conservative style are less than that of the swingier, more aggressive style.
One advantage that all players admit youthful players have over the aging players is their stamina. Older players tend to get tired and unfocused after several hours at a tournament or cash game, and they are forced to make a choice of whether they should continue to play tired or leave a good game. Younger players often play for eight or twelve hour stretches without compromising their ability to play poker, and this is a significant advantage in tournaments spanning multiple days where players have to stay on the top of their game even after playing a large number of hours.
Many of the game’s top players are getting into their thirties and forties, and whether they can hold on to their position on the leader boards for the next ten years will show once and for all whether age is a relevant factor in poker success. It seems very likely that the older, more experienced players who found success after the poker boom will be so much more experienced and skilled than young players that they will beat all but the toughest games, even as they age.
Related Entries
Related posts:
