Jack of all, master of none?

    • Ejeckt
      Ejeckt
      Bronze
      Joined: 06.12.2008 Posts: 517
      In the magazine Bluff I was reading an article about Phil Shaw, a pretty successful poker player, and about his experiences. Apparently he [successfully] plays all the poker games and formats, and claims that this is his biggest strength.

      What do you guys think? Should only a select few try to divide their time over all the poker games and the rest should stick to one or two specific games and formats? Or can everyone try do what Shaw did and attempt to master every poker discipline and format?

      What do you think it depends on? Personality, aptitude, time?
  • 1 reply
    • nafar84
      nafar84
      Bronze
      Joined: 20.09.2008 Posts: 546
      Any serious poker player should aspire to eventually become good with all variants. Many of the pros that have become famous on TV because of Hold'em actually consider themselves to be better in other variants than in Hold'em.

      As a poker player your main goal is to find juicy games with weak players over whom you have an edge. Mastering all variants of poker will help you jump into any soft game regardless of which variant is being played. If you find a table full of fish who are playing stud hi/lo but you can't join because you're not familiar with the game then you're not a good poker player at all.
      You don't have to be a MASTER at stud hi/lo, just good enough to beat the fish.

      I also read some pro (I think it was Lindgren) who said that learning a new variant will help you find leaks in your current variant. Strange but true. It's like you go back to the fundamentals and go over all the things you have taken for granted in your "main" variant, which maybe you have become careless about.