Life is Loco... - Page 3

On July 25 2010 19:34 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:21 Loco wrote:   On July 25 2010 19:13 Bejamin1 wrote:   On July 25 2010 18:32 Loco wrote: Your main premise is a false assumption to begin with. I first and foremost believe there isn't such a thing as running bad. Nothing should be surprising out of life. Everything that happens to a person has been a possibility. It's been nature doing its own thing, in other words it is equity (sounds familiar?), and it's only ever bizarre to be surprised or upset about it. But I know this isn't exactly commonly accepted, and we can't really run away from the concepts of luck, no matter how little logical sense they actually really make if the world is deterministic (which I maintain). Nature is indifferent, so should you be. This, of course, isn't to be applied when it comes to Man's evil toward Man, as there is plenty to rebel against in this case, but only in that natural laws govern everything that we know. So, using our interpretation that there is such a thing as running bad (again, I think there is only 'running' in actuality...), it doesn't justify complaining about it, because it accomplishes nothing. It's illogical to be upset with something you have no control over. If I lose electricity in my house today because of a big thunderstorm, is it logical for me to cry out loud and scream about how unfair this all is? It makes no sense at all, it was a possibility to begin with, now I have to deal with it as best as I can. The same is true for any situation, the same is true for poker. If Newblish is angry, let him be angry at himself, for he has nothing else to be angry about. In this way he can learn something. Once you blame external events, you lose your chance at growth. NOTHING easy ever has much new substance or growth. He can curse at the world all he wants, the world doesn't care, and he's not doing himself or anybody a favor. A player "should" never win a certain amount, since there was always the possibility of him not winning it if he didn't have a 100% chance of winning. Equity stabilizes itself, life wouldn't exist otherwise. We choose to interpret that he "should" or "deserved" to have had that sum. And when we believe this ourselves (delude ourselves) we cause ourselves much unneeded grief. I don't know why you tell me I'm biased, it's obvious that there was something personal. You're biased yourself, so why use it against me? You are his friend. He's probably very upset right now and you're stepping up for him, so no matter how spot-on I might be, being his friend you are most likely going to refuse to really hear what I have to say. My goal was to upset him, and anybody who has that mentality, a mentality that I once had myself and I sure wish someone would've slapped me in the face back then, too. Understandably, when you've been spoon-fed all your life, you don't grow up as fast as you should. I don't know who you're trying to convince by telling us you've seen him play and everything and we have no idea. His graphs show exactly what they show. Let the people be judges... I for one think he has nothing to complain about. You're basically claiming the the expression of anger can never be a good thing because it is not productive. I think it's good to release anger and stress rather that bottling it up inside and pretending it doesn't exist. Most people feel negative emotions when things aren't going well. I hold the opinion that expressing these emotions and moving on is better than simply ignoring them. This is a very common misconception about my worldview. I do not repress negative emotions, I guess the best way to put it is that I "reason them out". I use my reasoning abilities to reduce them to a minimum. Anger is a natural reaction, but it should stay just a reaction and not something that eats you from the inside. It can only stay a reaction if you have the right kind of thinking. While it might feel good to release the anger, if you don't learn anything from it then there's nothing positive about it, especially not considering the fact that you can hurt others in the process. If you're composed when facing a situation, you're much more likely to make the best decision than if you're angry. You clearly believe that there is a better way to deal with anger than simply releasing it. That's fine but it doesn't work for everybody. Some people like to hit the weights and expand that frustration into something positive (fitness) and some people like to remind themselves how irrational anger is and how unproductive it is and use that to diffuse and release their emotions. What I'm saying is that neither way is better than the other. Saying someone is childish or stupid because of how they express their anger isn't anything more than you being a prick. If you had a younger sister who was really pissed off and upset about her boyfriend breaking up with her would you tell her why it's irrational to care about someone who treated them like shit/didn't care enough to be with them or would you just let them work through the emotions and get over it aka a good cry and a girly movie with girlfriends? You don't like that Newblish deals with his anger in a different way than you do. That's fine but frankly keep it to yourself? Not everybody is you man.

How do you know if one is better than the other? You have no practice with it. Let me ask you this, if you were a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp, would it help you more to lift some weights to dissipate your anger/grief or would making use of reason be a wiser choice? Life experiences make for different coping mechanisms. Some are indefinitely more valuable than others.

Cleanthes once opined that the wicked man is "like a dog tied to a cart, and compelled to go wherever it goes." ... I believe that as long as you have this worldview you are a wicked man.

On July 25 2010 19:37 Bejamin1 wrote: Why do you assume that someones behavior on an internet forum is similar to their real life attitude? You only see a sliver of who people are in anonymous conversations over the internet. Pretending that you can somehow extrapolate that sliver into an entire human being and understand them is bullshit.

Does it really matter what he's like "in real life?" When he created the account Newblish, he created an online persona that may or may not be true to his actual tendencies in person. But it doesn't matter how "accurate" his online persona is with regards to his physical form because all that matters on this site is how the online persona acts and interacts with other netizens.

I didn't get the sense that Loco is claiming to have completely analyzed Newblish as he is away from the computer. He just saw the evidence/data that was available to him (excessive bitching, casual remarks about certain topics, blogposts, etc.), drew conclusions from the evidence at hand that disgusted him, and made a post about it.

Newblish can defend himself or, in a more healthy way, just laugh it off if Loco's ideas about him are so far-fetched and off-the-mark. I mean, if Newblish is actually a totally grounded, healthy, emotionally restrained and practical person in real life, he must view his own online bitching as more of a joke than anything else. No need for you, as his friend, to get so worked over it when someone has a bone to pick with this "inaccurate" online persona.

"You don't like that Newblish deals with his anger in a different way than you do. That's fine but frankly keep it to yourself? Not everybody is you man"

So it's ok for Newblish to vent his anger on here about some retarded crap but it's not ok for me to "not keep to myself" ... isn't that hypocritical and the most biased statement ever?

I don't believe in stealth living. I speak my mind. Don't act like an idiot and I won't react. If I act like an idiot I'm happy if there's anyone there to catch me in the process and make me aware of it, so should you.

On July 25 2010 19:46 Sanai wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:37 Bejamin1 wrote: Why do you assume that someones behavior on an internet forum is similar to their real life attitude? You only see a sliver of who people are in anonymous conversations over the internet. Pretending that you can somehow extrapolate that sliver into an entire human being and understand them is bullshit. Does it really matter what he's like "in real life?" When he created the account Newblish, he created an online persona that may or may not be true to his actual tendencies in person. But it doesn't matter how "accurate" his online persona is with regards to his physical form because all that matters on this site is how the online persona acts and interacts with other netizens. I didn't get the sense that Loco is claiming to have completely analyzed Newblish as he is away from the computer. He just saw the evidence/data that was available to him (excessive bitching, casual remarks about certain topics, blogposts, etc.), drew conclusions from the evidence at hand that disgusted him, and made a post about it. Newblish can defend himself or, in a more healthy way, just laugh it off if Loco's ideas about him are so far-fetched and off-the-mark. I mean, if Newblish is actually a totally grounded, healthy, emotionally restrained and practical person in real life, he must view his own online bitching as more of a joke than anything else. No need for you, as his friend, to get so worked over it when someone has a bone to pick with this "inaccurate" online persona.

Exactly. If I'm so far off, there shouldn't have been such a reaction. Do people react to trolls in such a way? No... we have a good laugh, or not.

"How do you know if one is better than the other?" -Loco

I said neither was better than the other. They're just different. Releasing the anger through working out or posting cathartic blogs is no different than rationalizing it to diffuse it's intensity. They're both a method of dealing with anger in a way that prevents it from negatively effecting your game on the tables. They both have the positive result of stopping the anger from entering a persons play on the tables.

You're sitting here and belittling someone for dealing with negative emotions in a way that annoys you because it's not the way you think it should be done. That's pathetic and you need to get a life. You're not doing anybody a service. You're just being a dick. You're trying to push your worldview and opinion on others.

Show me some studies that say it's better to deal with poker anger by rationalizing it than it is to go hit a watermelon with a baseball bat and feel the release of tension. The only thing you're backing your opinion up with is more of your own opinion. Why should everyone else live their life the way you think is right? Who made you the authority on these matters?

holy crap you guys who the f cares lol

On July 25 2010 19:47 Loco wrote: "You don't like that Newblish deals with his anger in a different way than you do. That's fine but frankly keep it to yourself? Not everybody is you man" So it's ok for Newblish to vent his anger on here about some retarded crap but it's not ok for me to "not keep to myself" ... isn't that hypocritical and the most biased statement ever? I don't believe in stealth living. I speak my mind. Don't act like an idiot and I won't react. If I act like an idiot I'm happy if there's anyone there to catch me in the process and make me aware of it, so should you.

You weren't expressing your point of view. You were insulting some directly in a clearly over-the-top manner. If you wanted to be constructive you could have simply written a blog about how you feel whine-blogs and whine-hand-history posts are negative for the poker community. How you feel they are the wrong perspective to take when things don't go well.

Instead you made a dickish sarcastic blog about a friend of mine making yourself look like a stupid asshole. Don't pretend you were doing something in service of the community. You were just being a dick.

On July 25 2010 20:02 bigredhoss wrote: holy crap you guys who the f cares lol

uhh this

On July 25 2010 19:58 Bejamin1 wrote: "How do you know if one is better than the other?" -Loco I said neither was better than the other. They're just different. Releasing the anger through working out or posting cathartic blogs is no different than rationalizing it to diffuse it's intensity. They're both a method of dealing with anger in a way that prevents it from negatively effecting your game on the tables. They both have the positive result of stopping the anger from entering a persons play on the tables. You're sitting here and belittling someone for dealing with negative emotions in a way that annoys you because it's not the way you think it should be done. That's pathetic and you need to get a life. You're not doing anybody a service. You're just being a dick. You're trying to push your worldview and opinion on others. Show me some studies that say it's better to deal with poker anger by rationalizing it than it is to go hit a watermelon with a baseball bat and feel the release of tension. The only thing you're backing your opinion up with is more of your own opinion. Why should everyone else live their life the way you think is right? Who made you the authority on these matters?

Well, anybody who wishes to have the results and behavior that Newblish exhibits are free to use his wise and extremely practical anger management techniques. For those who wish to become Men they might want to look the other way, though.

What I'm trying to do is not tell anybody how they should live their lives, but rather force them to re-evaluate it. Nothing more.

Again, you're being hypocritical. How is it pathetic of me to post these messages but it's not pathetic of someone to vent his hatred toward himself on these boards, and constantly complain about his bad luck in life when there are people who are starving to death as we are typing these messages? ... Mind boggling.

And if your models in living are people who hit watermelons with baseball bats instead of wise men, then I don't know what to say to you.

On July 25 2010 20:09 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:47 Loco wrote: "You don't like that Newblish deals with his anger in a different way than you do. That's fine but frankly keep it to yourself? Not everybody is you man" So it's ok for Newblish to vent his anger on here about some retarded crap but it's not ok for me to "not keep to myself" ... isn't that hypocritical and the most biased statement ever? I don't believe in stealth living. I speak my mind. Don't act like an idiot and I won't react. If I act like an idiot I'm happy if there's anyone there to catch me in the process and make me aware of it, so should you. You weren't expressing your point of view. You were insulting some directly in a clearly over-the-top manner. If you wanted to be constructive you could have simply written a blog about how you feel whine-blogs and whine-hand-history posts are negative for the poker community. How you feel they are the wrong perspective to take when things don't go well. Instead you made a dickish sarcastic blog about a friend of mine making yourself look like a stupid asshole. Don't pretend you were doing something in service of the community. You were just being a dick.

Well you're free to believe whatever you want, but you don't know anything about my motives. I made the blog as it is because there's more chance people will read through it if it's entertaining. Nobody is here for a lecture.

On July 25 2010 19:46 Sanai wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 19:37 Bejamin1 wrote: Why do you assume that someones behavior on an internet forum is similar to their real life attitude? You only see a sliver of who people are in anonymous conversations over the internet. Pretending that you can somehow extrapolate that sliver into an entire human being and understand them is bullshit. Does it really matter what he's like "in real life?" When he created the account Newblish, he created an online persona that may or may not be true to his actual tendencies in person. But it doesn't matter how "accurate" his online persona is with regards to his physical form because all that matters on this site is how the online persona acts and interacts with other netizens. I didn't get the sense that Loco is claiming to have completely analyzed Newblish as he is away from the computer. He just saw the evidence/data that was available to him (excessive bitching, casual remarks about certain topics, blogposts, etc.), drew conclusions from the evidence at hand that disgusted him, and made a post about it. Newblish can defend himself or, in a more healthy way, just laugh it off if Loco's ideas about him are so far-fetched and off-the-mark. I mean, if Newblish is actually a totally grounded, healthy, emotionally restrained and practical person in real life, he must view his own online bitching as more of a joke than anything else. No need for you, as his friend, to get so worked over it when someone has a bone to pick with this "inaccurate" online persona.

Loco wrote a blog rife with inaccuracy and filled with insults. Nobody is disputing that Newblish has posted some whine-blogs or whine-hand-histories. What offended me as his friend is that Loco is claiming he's delusional, crazy, an idiot, and has no clue what running bad is. This is simply not true. I'm not just going to sit back and allow someone to slander a friend of mine when they clearly don't have a clue what they're talking about.

He has no clue what bad luck is, and this should be fucking obvious already... give me a break. He's delusional and so are you right now, you are way too emotional to see any of this clearly.

It's not like I said that the guy is a scammer and you absolutely need to defend his reputation. There's absolutely no real reason for you to react the way you are reacting now, no matter how close to the guy you might be. Everyone knows that he's a whiner, nothing has changed, except some more people are aware of it now. Big deal...

Loco honestly you're not worth this trouble. I see what Newblish meant in his reply on your blog. You're just too stupid and narrow-minded to ever admit you're wrong about anything.

It is way out of line to make a personal hate blog about another individual on this site. The crap you're spewing out about how you're trying to help others face their issues is just a load of bull. Sending a kindly PM suggesting an alternative to whine-blogs and whine-hand-histories is helping. Trying to publicly humiliate someone without any actual evidence of whether they run bad or good is just you being a dick. What you're doing is effectively alienating a good poker mind from the community by ostracizing him and attempting to humiliate him. That doesn't help LP in fact it hurts it.

On July 25 2010 20:28 Loco wrote: "He has no clue what bad luck is, and this should be fucking obvious already"... give me a break. He's delusional and so are you right now, you are way too emotional to see any of this clearly.

Actually I'm not emotional or delusional. I'm extremely logical and rational. You're making bold and frankly insulting claims about a friend of mine with zero evidence. Last I checked you've never seen his database or done a proper analysis of all hands over 50bb's. So how do you know whether he runs bad or not?

You've not made one reply to this counter-point. The reason why is because you can't. You have zero evidence. All you have is your opinion. That's why your a retarded asshole and that's why your sarcastic and insulting blog designed to humiliate my friend offends me. You're a stupid asshole and I'm calling you out on it.

On July 25 2010 20:42 Bejamin1 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 25 2010 20:28 Loco wrote: "He has no clue what bad luck is, and this should be fucking obvious already"... give me a break. He's delusional and so are you right now, you are way too emotional to see any of this clearly. All you have is your opinion. That's why your a retarded asshole and that's why your sarcastic and insulting blog designed to humiliate my friend offends me. You're a stupid asshole and I'm calling you out on it.

" What you're doing is effectively alienating a good poker mind from the community."

I'd be surprised if he can even tie his shoelaces together without any help, you're accrediting him way too much.

you guys are hilarious... me and Baal are soooooo narrow-minded and we always think we're right... that's why we had a go against each others for years and now we're great friends... makes perfect sense.

Loco. I dare you to actually respond to my challenges of your opinions validity.

1. Why was writing an attack blog which ostracizes a good poker mind from the community better than simply PMing him and talking about it with him personally?

2. Why haven't you addressed the fact that you have zero evidence to support your claim that he doesn't run bad. I've seen his database. I know he runs bad. What do you have?

On July 25 2010 21:00 Loco wrote: I'd be surprised if he can even tie his shoelaces together without any help, you're accrediting him way too much.

There it is folks. Plain as day for everyone to see. Pretty obvious you just don't like Newblish. He's a solid winning player at 1/2 and 2/4 NLHU over a pretty good sample size. You've clearly made your angry blog about him as some sort of personal vendetta. This quote alone pretty much destroys any credibility of your opinions about him. If I want to learn about someone the last person I'm going to ask is someone who dislikes them.

1. It's not like I haven't tried that approach. When he made whiny posts I responded with normal criticism and explaining to him how his thinking was flawed. We chatted a bit on msn, he agreed that he had a lot of work to do. His behavior never changed and he never came back to ask me questions about how to do this (which I would've gladly answered). Leading to this.

2. I've already covered all this bullshit about running bad already that's why I'm ignoring it, you either just want me to keep wasting my time repeating myself or you don't have the capacity to understand it. Give me a break, nobody on this site has anything to complain about, having the opportunity to play poker for a living is a dream come true and that should say enough in itself.