Daniel Negreanu sets Twitter alight after suggesting it's easier to make money in poker today than it was in pre-Internet times prompting Lee Davy to have a deeper look at the argument.

Is it easier to win money in poker today than it was pre-Internet?

Daniel Negreanu thinks so. Over the weekend, he took a break from tweeting about politics and basketball to air his view that it was 'so much easier' to win money playing poker today than before the creation of the Internet.

It was a tweet that saw members of the poker community smashing their mouse into their skulls in despair. Others nodded their heads. Opinions are divided suggesting it's a story in need of poking and prodding a little further.

So are the likes of Phil Galfond and Daniel Cates better players than Chip Reese and Doyle Brunson? And why does Negreanu think it's 'so much easier' to win in poker today?

Let's start by looking at athletes.

Are Athletes Stronger, Better, and Faster Today?

In his book The Sports Gene: Talent, Practice and the Truth About Success, journalist and author, David Epstein takes a look at the assumption that question is right because of the gradual improvement in recorded achievements such as world record times in athletics.

Is it Easier to Win Money in Poker Today Than it Was Pre-Internet?In his TED Talk on the subject, Epstein compares Jesse Owens 100m world record time of 10.2 seconds, set in 1936, with the 100m World Championships time of 9.77 seconds set by Usain Bolt in 2013. The time Owens set in 1936 would have put him 14 feet behind Bolt in that 2013 race.

"That's a lot in sprinter land." Said Epstein.

And then he creates an audio experience of a 14-foot gap by using the sound of two blips. The difference is imperceptible. Next, Epstein discusses research from Sports Scientist, Ross Tucker, reminding us that Owens had to run his race on a track laden with ash, and had to use a trowel to dig a hole for his heel to sit at the start of the race.

In contrast, Bolt was running on a synthetic track and had the aid of starting blocks. He didn't even mention the advancements in running shoes, clothing, and training techniques. Had Owens ran on the same track as Bolt he would have only been a stride behind the world record holder.

Epstein points to three factors that have contributed to the improvements we see in our athletes today.

1. Technology

2. Democratisation

3. Imagination

In a look at world class swimming accomplishments, Epstein noted that there was a spike in improved times in 1956 after the invention of the flip-turn. The same happened in 1974 when swimming pools installed side guttering to cater for the overflow and reduce turbulence. In 2008, there was another spike in improvement at the same time people designed the first all-in-one low friction body suits.

How Does This Apply to Poker?

One of the reasons Negreanu believes modern poker players have it easier than the pioneers of the past has to do with Epstein's research on how technology has allowed human beings to surpass the achievements of those that played before us.

I am no poker historian, but from the pieces of literature I have read, I have learned that sharing information was not a popular pastime in the pre-Internet era. It was viewed as foolish to share trade secrets. Interestingly, there is a tranche of modern players who also believe this when I hear them complaining about the creation of online poker training sites.

I interview a lot of poker players. I ask them what are the important ways of learning. They commonly answer that sharing information with great players is one of the quickest ways to improve your game. The Internet created the ease at which these conversations flowed due to the creation of online forums.

Then there are other forms of technology. Online poker allows modern day players to consume thousands more hands than their predecessors. By default, they can learn at a much faster rate. They reach the Anders Ericsson 10,000 hours rule of mastery far quicker than any other time in history.

Then you have Heads Up Displays (HUDs). A human/artificial intelligence (AI) symbiosis that creates an insight into your opponent that easily outstrips that of a pre-Internet player.

In 2005, an online chess site called Playchess.com hosted an event known as the 'freestyle' chess tournament. For the first time in history, they allowed human chess players and AI to compete in partnership for the title.

At the beginning of the event, things went predictably to plan. The Grandmaster using a weak laptop easily beat the strongest of computers. So you would think the ultimate winner would be a Grandmaster using a high-end laptop. Instead, the winner was a team consisting of two amateur American chess players and three computers.

They determined that the weak human/machine/better process approach was stronger than the approach taken by the strong human/machine/inferior process.

I believe there are parallels between what happened in that event, and what would happen if you did the same in poker, and there are players who use HUDs to their advantage all of the time. While there is an argument that use of an HUD prevents you from logically considering all options yourself, I believe it helps improve your win rate, which is Negreanu's argument.

Then you have the advancement of learning tools such as electronic hand histories, Poker Stove type simulators, charts, ICM models, online training sites, and individual coaching brought on through an extension of understanding the value of earning a few extra dollars, and increasing one's self-satisfaction through coaching.

Let's step back further in time and how important was the introduction of hole camera technology and the ability to watch poker played on television shows like Late Night Poker and World Poker Tour.

Democratization

The whole debate arose after Nolan Dalla tweeted this footage of the 1975 WSOP.

The commentator says all the players competing in the Main Event have the same three things in common.

• They are rich

• They make their money playing cards

• The majority are from Texas

I want to focus on the third point.

"They were all from Texas."

The rise of the Internet and social media connects the globe like never before. It allows us to branch out and learn so much from people we would never have been able to reach in a pre-Internet world.

I think the various styles and strategies that we see from Scandinavia, the UK, Asia, and America, has led to a more rounded and skilled poker player. I don't believe the pre-Internet poker players gained in this way as they largely competed against stock from their own backyard.

Is Doyle Brunson Better Than Scott Seiver? Is Jason Mercier Better Than Doug Polk? Is Phil Ivey The Greatest Poker Player Alive?

This is a reprint from calvinayre.com. to view the original, click here.