| |
Main
Date: 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/10a443238c4e7ebe/25d5c2c50b16566f?lnk=gst&q=Greg+Raymer#25d5c2c50b16566f
Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
and would never think of playing poker for a living.
Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:36:15
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 8:30=A0pm, "DG7777" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:gn4sjc$bq6$=
1@news.motzarella.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> >news:5779716c-8626-4cb8-9d48-64a5d8b989ff@c12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com..=
.
>
> >> What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money?
>
> > One who promised his wife he'd never (directly) replenish
> > his roll with pocket money.
>
> >> I think
> >> that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
> >> his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
> >> travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
> >> yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
> >> about keeping records.
>
> > Didn't see what type of deal he gave/received when he was looking
> > to be staked in the wsop, did he get the full buyin? Did backers pay
> > travel expenses? =A0I'll have to look later (busy at the moment =3D)
>
> For sake of completion...
> I looked around, and it seems Greg won his entry on pokerstars!
> Want to tell me again how his travel expenses came out of his roll?
> So, he already had his ME entry paid for, why the need for backers?
> I'll give you 3 guesses, try to fill in the blanks: =A0T--vel E-pe--e-!
>
> I think we're done here, Will.
> That is, unless you want to apologize =3D)
For disagreeing with your guesses? For thinking that you are being
extremely negative for no reason?
I didn't realize that you were this big an asshole. I'm sorry that I
found out.
Is that enough of an apology?
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 21:01:20
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:943de0fc-ef7a-475d-84c0-c4043c6caf97@h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 8:30 pm, "DG7777" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote in
> messagenews:gn4sjc$bq6$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> >news:5779716c-8626-4cb8-9d48-64a5d8b989ff@c12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money?
>
> > One who promised his wife he'd never (directly) replenish
> > his roll with pocket money.
>
> >> I think
> >> that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
> >> his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
> >> travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
> >> yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
> >> about keeping records.
>
> > Didn't see what type of deal he gave/received when he was looking
> > to be staked in the wsop, did he get the full buyin? Did backers pay
> > travel expenses? I'll have to look later (busy at the moment =)
>
> For sake of completion...
> I looked around, and it seems Greg won his entry on pokerstars!
> Want to tell me again how his travel expenses came out of his roll?
> So, he already had his ME entry paid for, why the need for backers?
> I'll give you 3 guesses, try to fill in the blanks: T--vel E-pe--e-!
>
> I think we're done here, Will.
> That is, unless you want to apologize =)
- For disagreeing with your guesses? For thinking that you are being
- extremely negative for no reason?
My 'guesses' were backed up (multiple times) by Greg's own words.
Each and every one of your statements on the other hand...
- I didn't realize that you were this big an asshole.
- I'm sorry that I found out.
You called me out with:
"Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else."
and I'm the asshole? For defending myself?
- Is that enough of an apology?
I guess it will have to be.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:52:43
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 8:36 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Feb 13, 8:30 pm, "DG7777" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote in
messagenews:gn4sjc$bq6$1@news.motzarella.org...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > >news:5779716c-8626-4cb8-9d48-64a5d8b989ff@c12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com....
> >
> > >> What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money?
> >
> > > One who promised his wife he'd never (directly) replenish
> > > his roll with pocket money.
> >
> > >> I think
> > >> that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
> > >> his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
> > >> travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
> > >> yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
> > >> about keeping records.
> >
> > > Didn't see what type of deal he gave/received when he was looking
> > > to be staked in the wsop, did he get the full buyin? Did backers pay
> > > travel expenses? I'll have to look later (busy at the moment =)
> >
> > For sake of completion...
> > I looked around, and it seems Greg won his entry on pokerstars!
> > Want to tell me again how his travel expenses came out of his roll?
> > So, he already had his ME entry paid for, why the need for backers?
> > I'll give you 3 guesses, try to fill in the blanks: T--vel E-pe--e-!
> >
> > I think we're done here, Will.
> > That is, unless you want to apologize =)
>
> For disagreeing with your guesses? For thinking that you are being
> extremely negative for no reason?
>
> I didn't realize that you were this big an asshole. I'm sorry that I
> found out.
>
> Is that enough of an apology?
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
Congrats Will, you just got thoroughly trolled.
Fell
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
_____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:50:06
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 4:38=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messagenew=
s:1e06de00-e556-42e4-9fda-fd3adc41f52f@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 4:24 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > They must have sold better back then because no one was
> > buying them at Foxwoods a few years later. I remember
> > almost buying one and I wished that he had when he won
> > it all. But I had my turtle card protector by then and didn't
> > want to give it up. And he did buy them out of his
> > bankroll, so it wasn't pure profit.
>
> Link to *anything* in which he states he bought the rocks
> (and jewelry he used to sell) with funds from his bankroll
> please. =A0Until you provide one, I'll assume you're making
> shit up.
Why is it that you want to make the assumption that he was being
dishonest and I have to prove that he was being honest? If you _want_
to believe that he was cheating on his agreement with his wife, what
good would it be to argue with you. That's what seems to be going on
here. Using part of his bankroll (at eight dollars a shot, a small
part) to make more money would be legit within the agreement. Your the
one who ASSUMES otherwise.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:43:47
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:03f42a54-9da8-4d57-b931-eaddd7042df4@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 4:38 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> messagenews:1e06de00-e556-42e4-9fda-fd3adc41f52f@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 4:24 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > They must have sold better back then because no one was
> > buying them at Foxwoods a few years later. I remember
> > almost buying one and I wished that he had when he won
> > it all. But I had my turtle card protector by then and didn't
> > want to give it up. And he did buy them out of his
> > bankroll, so it wasn't pure profit.
>
> Link to *anything* in which he states he bought the rocks
> (and jewelry he used to sell) with funds from his bankroll
> please. Until you provide one, I'll assume you're making
> shit up.
- Why is it that you want to make the assumption that he was
- being dishonest and I have to prove that he was being honest?
Where do I state anything he did was dishonest?
He made a stupid promise to his wife (I know firsthand, as
I made a similar one to mine) and he found a way around it!
More power to him!
- If you _want_to believe that he was cheating on his
- agreement with his wife, what good would it be to argue with you.
- That's what seems to be going on here.
Nice spin, but you might want to go back and read my OP
that you jumped on... I claimed (and since proved by quoting
his own words) that he was funding his play selling his wares...
- Using part of his bankroll (at eight dollars a shot, a small part) to
- make more money would be legit within the agreement.
$8 a shot was RGP's *price* - he got the rocks for less ...
- Your the one who ASSUMES otherwise.
Irrelevant. You're the one straying from your original
statements... I stand by all of mine.
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:44:53
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 4:34=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messagenew=
s:df3b9a57-2285-4597-9c67-75cefaa52eaa@j1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 4:19 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroup=
s.com...
> > On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> > > messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegro=
ups.com...
> > > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in mess=
age
> > > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to ca=
ll
> > > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more
> > > > > into
> > > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuation=
s
> > > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> > > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> > > ---
>
> > > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > > straight into the bankroll!
>
> > - How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> > - of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money
>
> > Ding ding ding!
>
> > - instead
> > - of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case,
>
> > Certainly seems the case.
>
> > - the amouns were miniscule.
> > - Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> > - nothing.
>
> >http://www.fossilmanpoker.com/fossils.htm
>
> > He started with 1K, no? Promised he wouldn't put any
> > more in... $40 for a rock adds up!
> > 25 rocks =3D replenished bankroll! woohoo!
>
> - Not if you paid twenty dollars a rock. Those "rocks" were
> - fossils that had been readied for sale to museums. As I
> - said, it wasn't clear profit and
>
> LOL
> Did you know RGP'ers got a discount?
>
> "You can feel free to say hi to me. =A0I am a big guy who always has a bu=
nch
> of
> rocks (fossils) on the table in front of him. =A0Even if fossils don't
> interest you, feel free to ask me lots of loud questions about them, as I
> sell them at the cardroom, and don't mind your help in advertising. =A0;-=
) =A0If
> you do wish to buy, talk to me about a price in private, as if there are =
any
> non-rgpers about, you won't hear about the special rgp price. =A0In other
> words, rgpers get to buy at just above my cost, but no one else is suppos=
ed
> to know, as I don't want locals who have bought previously to hear that y=
ou
> just paid $8 for a fossil" =A0 Raymer on RGP - 1999
>
> note: 'just above my cost' / '$8'
>
> Do you really want to keep going with this?
So he was making thirty-two dollars per. That's a nice markup. It
still isn't going to make anyone rich when they don't sell tons of
them.
>
>
>
> > - Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
>
> > nonsense? I'm relaying what I (and everyone that watched)
> > heard during the airing of the 04 wsop ME! The flat out stated
> > that he sold fossils to fund his play, brought extras with him
> > EVERY time he played live to try to sell to the other players
>
> - The key word here is _tried_ He never sold many.
>
> BULLSHIT! =A0Not only was he selling rocks, he also
> frequently sold jewelry ... =A0I can provide links and you
> can read it all from Greg himself... keep arguing! =3D)
He tried to sell a lot of things but you never saw many of them
moving. It may have been partly because everyone at Foxwoods who
wanted one of the card protectors already had one but they were not
selling for a couple of years there. But he was able to keep playing.
>
> - He may have sold more
> - of them when he wasn't at his Foxwoods and that might have helped with
> - his travel expenses, which came out of his bankroll.
>
> link please. =A0Where did he state travel expenses came out of his roll
What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money? I think
that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
about keeping records.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 17:35:28
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:5779716c-8626-4cb8-9d48-64a5d8b989ff@c12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money?
One who promised his wife he'd never (directly) replenish
his roll with pocket money.
> I think
> that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
> his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
> travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
> yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
> about keeping records.
Didn't see what type of deal he gave/received when he was looking
to be staked in the wsop, did he get the full buyin? Did backers pay
travel expenses? I'll have to look later (busy at the moment =)
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 20:30:27
From: DG7777
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Mark B [Diputsur]" <diputsur@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:gn4sjc$bq6$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> news:5779716c-8626-4cb8-9d48-64a5d8b989ff@c12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
>> What poker player takes poker expenses out of pocket money?
>
> One who promised his wife he'd never (directly) replenish
> his roll with pocket money.
>
>> I think
>> that it would be illogical to assume that he didn't take them out of
>> his roll. I'm not talking about travel expenses generally but poker
>> travel. If you don't pay for that out of your roll you are fooling
>> yourself about your profitability. He seemed pretty conscientious
>> about keeping records.
>
> Didn't see what type of deal he gave/received when he was looking
> to be staked in the wsop, did he get the full buyin? Did backers pay
> travel expenses? I'll have to look later (busy at the moment =)
For sake of completion...
I looked around, and it seems Greg won his entry on pokerstars!
Want to tell me again how his travel expenses came out of his roll?
So, he already had his ME entry paid for, why the need for backers?
I'll give you 3 guesses, try to fill in the blanks: T--vel E-pe--e-!
I think we're done here, Will.
That is, unless you want to apologize =)
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Feb 2009 06:55:28
From: Patti Beadles
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
In article <gn56rg$qqj$1@news.motzarella.org >,
DG7777 <diputsur@gmail.com > wrote:
>For sake of completion...
>I looked around, and it seems Greg won his entry on pokerstars!
>Want to tell me again how his travel expenses came out of his roll?
>So, he already had his ME entry paid for, why the need for backers?
>I'll give you 3 guesses, try to fill in the blanks: T--vel E-pe--e-!
Greg's backing agreement was not for the WSOP alone-- it
covered all of the games that he played online and live
for a period of approximately six months at a time.
When he won the seat on PokerStars, the entry fee for the
satellite had come out of the bankroll. In a logical sense,
the value of the main event seat and his travel expenses
went into the bankroll temporarily, and then were spent from
it when he entered the main event.
-Patti
--
Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:30:45
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 4:24=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messagenew=
s:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroup=
s.com...
> > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messag=
e
> > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more in=
to
> > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> > ---
>
> > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > straight into the bankroll!
>
> How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money instead
> of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case, the amouns were
> miniscule. Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> nothing. Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
>
> --------
> FYI - straight from the horses mouth:
>
> "In about 1995 I made a deal with my wife that I would have a bankroll fo=
r
> poker, separate from my income, savings, and investments. This bankroll w=
as
> $1000. If I played and won, I could do whatever I wanted with the money,
> e.g., move up in limits, buy stuff, whatever. However, if I lost all of t=
he
> money, I had promised to quit playing poker forever. In about 1996, my wi=
fe
> took me to a rock and mineral show in San Diego, where we lived at that
> time. I bought an orthoceras fossil because I thought it was neat and wou=
ld
> make a great card protector. Many of the other players at the Oceanside C=
ard
> Club also thought it was neat. I then had the idea to go back to the show=
,
> buy more fossils, and sell them at a profit. And it worked quite well. So=
, I
> went into the business of selling fossils whenever I played poker, as a w=
ay
> of more quickly building my bankroll so I could get into bigger games."
>
> Care to argue some more?- Hide quoted text -
They must have sold better back then because no one was buying them at
Foxwoods a few years later. I remember almost buying one and I wished
that he had when he won it all. But I had my turtle card protector by
then and didn't want to give it up. And he did buy them out of his
bankroll, so it wasn't pure profit.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:38:11
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:1e06de00-e556-42e4-9fda-fd3adc41f52f@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 4:24 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> They must have sold better back then because no one was
> buying them at Foxwoods a few years later. I remember
> almost buying one and I wished that he had when he won
> it all. But I had my turtle card protector by then and didn't
> want to give it up. And he did buy them out of his
> bankroll, so it wasn't pure profit.
Link to *anything* in which he states he bought the rocks
(and jewelry he used to sell) with funds from his bankroll
please. Until you provide one, I'll assume you're making
shit up.
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 13:27:17
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 4:19=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messagenew=
s:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroup=
s.com...
> > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messag=
e
> > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more in=
to
> > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> > ---
>
> > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > straight into the bankroll!
>
> - How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> - of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money
>
> Ding ding ding!
>
> - instead
> - of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case,
>
> Certainly seems the case.
>
> - the amouns were miniscule.
> - Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> - nothing.
>
> http://www.fossilmanpoker.com/fossils.htm
>
> He started with 1K, no? =A0Promised he wouldn't put any
> more in... $40 for a rock adds up!
> 25 rocks =3D replenished bankroll! woohoo!
Not if you paid twenty dollars a rock. Those "rocks" were fossils that
had been readied for sale to museums. As I said, it wasn't clear
profit and
>
> - Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
>
> nonsense? =A0I'm relaying what I (and everyone that watched)
> heard during the airing of the 04 wsop ME! =A0The flat out stated
> that he sold fossils to fund his play, brought extras with him
> EVERY time he played live to try to sell to the other players
The key word here is _tried_ He never sold many. He may have sold more
of them when he wasn't at his Foxwoods and that might have helped with
his travel expenses, which came out of his bankroll. The telecast made
much of them because they made a fairly bland, pleasant guy a lot more
colorful, like those stupid glasses.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:34:37
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:df3b9a57-2285-4597-9c67-75cefaa52eaa@j1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 4:19 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> messagenews:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more
> > > > into
> > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> > ---
>
> > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > straight into the bankroll!
>
> - How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> - of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money
>
> Ding ding ding!
>
> - instead
> - of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case,
>
> Certainly seems the case.
>
> - the amouns were miniscule.
> - Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> - nothing.
>
> http://www.fossilmanpoker.com/fossils.htm
>
> He started with 1K, no? Promised he wouldn't put any
> more in... $40 for a rock adds up!
> 25 rocks = replenished bankroll! woohoo!
- Not if you paid twenty dollars a rock. Those "rocks" were
- fossils that had been readied for sale to museums. As I
- said, it wasn't clear profit and
LOL
Did you know RGP'ers got a discount?
"You can feel free to say hi to me. I am a big guy who always has a bunch
of
rocks (fossils) on the table in front of him. Even if fossils don't
interest you, feel free to ask me lots of loud questions about them, as I
sell them at the cardroom, and don't mind your help in advertising. ;-) If
you do wish to buy, talk to me about a price in private, as if there are any
non-rgpers about, you won't hear about the special rgp price. In other
words, rgpers get to buy at just above my cost, but no one else is supposed
to know, as I don't want locals who have bought previously to hear that you
just paid $8 for a fossil" Raymer on RGP - 1999
note: 'just above my cost' / '$8'
Do you really want to keep going with this?
>
> - Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
>
> nonsense? I'm relaying what I (and everyone that watched)
> heard during the airing of the 04 wsop ME! The flat out stated
> that he sold fossils to fund his play, brought extras with him
> EVERY time he played live to try to sell to the other players
- The key word here is _tried_ He never sold many.
BULLSHIT! Not only was he selling rocks, he also
frequently sold jewelry ... I can provide links and you
can read it all from Greg himself... keep arguing! =)
- He may have sold more
- of them when he wasn't at his Foxwoods and that might have helped with
- his travel expenses, which came out of his bankroll.
link please. Where did he state travel expenses came out of his roll?
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 12:50:51
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 3:44=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in messagenew=
s:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> ---
>
> What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> promise he made his wife! =A0He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> so he stuck the rocks in the middle! =A0Sell a rock, money goes
> straight into the bankroll!
How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money instead
of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case, the amouns were
miniscule. Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
nothing. Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:33:40
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 3:50 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
>
messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
> >
> > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
> >
> > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
> >
> > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > straight into the bankroll!
>
> How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money instead
> of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case, the amouns were
> miniscule. Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> nothing. Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
>
> --
It was a sale of maritial assets and the proceeds of the sale went into
his bankroll, not just profits from the sale.
It was a money laundering scheme designed to convert maritial assets to
poker money.
________________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Feb 2009 06:32:37
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 5:33 PM, garycarson wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 3:50 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> >
>
messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
> > >
> > > > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > > > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
> > >
> > > > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > > > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
> > >
> > > I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> > > them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> > > have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> > > promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> > > so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> > > straight into the bankroll!
> >
> > How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
> > of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money instead
> > of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case, the amouns were
> > miniscule. Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
> > nothing. Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
> >
> > --
>
> It was a sale of maritial assets and the proceeds of the sale went into
> his bankroll, not just profits from the sale.
>
> It was a money laundering scheme designed to convert maritial assets to
> poker money.
NOPE .. His wife does the laundry . She said so in an interview!!
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
_____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:24:11
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> ---
>
> What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> straight into the bankroll!
How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money instead
of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case, the amouns were
miniscule. Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
nothing. Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
--------
FYI - straight from the horses mouth:
"In about 1995 I made a deal with my wife that I would have a bankroll for
poker, separate from my income, savings, and investments. This bankroll was
$1000. If I played and won, I could do whatever I wanted with the money,
e.g., move up in limits, buy stuff, whatever. However, if I lost all of the
money, I had promised to quit playing poker forever. In about 1996, my wife
took me to a rock and mineral show in San Diego, where we lived at that
time. I bought an orthoceras fossil because I thought it was neat and would
make a great card protector. Many of the other players at the Oceanside Card
Club also thought it was neat. I then had the idea to go back to the show,
buy more fossils, and sell them at a profit. And it worked quite well. So, I
went into the business of selling fossils whenever I played poker, as a way
of more quickly building my bankroll so I could get into bigger games."
Care to argue some more?
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:19:31
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:a405b9b1-a6f0-4590-9ed5-c974adf9999b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 3:44 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in
> messagenews:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> > news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> > WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> > You all forget why they called him fossilman?
>
> I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
> them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
> have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
>
> ---
>
> What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
> promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket -> roll,
> so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
> straight into the bankroll!
- How can the cost of what you are selling be irrelevant to the amount
- of profit. Even if he were paying for them out of pocket-money
Ding ding ding!
- instead
- of bankroll, which doesn't seem to be the case,
Certainly seems the case.
- the amouns were miniscule.
- Even if it was pure profit for his bankroll, it was nearly
- nothing.
http://www.fossilmanpoker.com/fossils.htm
He started with 1K, no? Promised he wouldn't put any
more in... $40 for a rock adds up!
25 rocks = replenished bankroll! woohoo!
- Now go type some all-caps nonsense to someone else.
nonsense? I'm relaying what I (and everyone that watched)
heard during the airing of the 04 wsop ME! The flat out stated
that he sold fossils to fund his play, brought extras with him
EVERY time he played live to try to sell to the other players.
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 12:34:13
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 3:14=A0pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, =A0of what I like to call
> > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> You all forget why they called him fossilman?
I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:44:20
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:dd5d1420-bdba-4f56-ab84-11ad65216c0d@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, "Mark B [Diputsur]" <diput...@gmail.com > wrote:
> "Will in New Haven" <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
> news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
>
> > It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> > amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> > "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> > it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> > never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> > paycheck money, although they were considerable.
>
> WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
> You all forget why they called him fossilman?
I know what he charged for those fossils and about what he paid for
them. And I have a really good idea how fast they sold. He could not
have funded a "career" at two-four limit on the sales of his fossils.
---
What he paid for them is irrelevant... it's how he got around the
promise he made his wife! He couldn't go from pocket - > roll,
so he stuck the rocks in the middle! Sell a rock, money goes
straight into the bankroll!
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 12:25:36
From: Deadmoney Walking
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13, 12:25=A0am, A Man Beaten by Jacks <nob...@fool.foo > wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:37:43 -0800 (PST), funky cold medina
>
>
>
>
>
> <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 12, 9:01=A0am, Will in New Haven
> ><bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>
> >> Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> >> that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> >> least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> >> luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> >> when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> >> when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> >> or the sand, to look you up.
>
> >> --
> >> Will in New Haven
>
> >Yeah. =A0Well put. =A0I don't really disagree with you guys. =A0Not my
> >intent to be petty and knock the man, I have the utmost respect for
> >what he was able to accomplish - and to top it off he seems like a
> >humble and good natured player. =A0Which is kinda uncommon.
>
> >Just wanted to illustrate that he ran pretty god damn well. =A0And that
> >helps. =A0A lot.
>
> If you win the Main Event, it is more or less a necessity. =A0You have
> to win your coin flips. =A0You probably have to suck out a couple times.
> And you have to NOT get unlucky the scores of times you're in it with
> the best of it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's an easy prediction, whoever wins the ME is called "lucky" I
haven't heard that about Eastget yet. But a lot of it is making good
plays that work.
Such as shoving AJ from the button for 6 bbs. Lucky if the bb has 72,
unlucky if he has KK, lucky if you spike the ace. But the original
decision was the correct one.
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 06:44:58
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 7:41=A0pm, "FangBanger" <a29b...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> On Feb 12 2009 11:01 AM, Will in New Haven wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 11:25=A0am, funky cold medina <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrot=
e:
>
> > > > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wro=
te:
>
> > > > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracele=
t
> > > > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final=
table
> > > > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey mov=
e after
> > > > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first =
few
> > > > > > minutes of it.
>
> > > > > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I k=
now very
> > > > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker god=
s were
> > > > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > > > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he calle=
d an
> > > > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he calle=
d an
> > > > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the riv=
er).
> > > > > And so on.
>
> > > > No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT.
> =A0Against
> > > > short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> > > > Fell
> > > > --
> > > > "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> > > > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> > Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> > > A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose=
by
> > > waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by gettin=
g
> > > it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> > > that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> > Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> > that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> > least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> > luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> > when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> > when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> > or the sand, to look you up.
>
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> So correct in the first part of this post and SOOOOOO LAME =A0in the last
> sentence.
>
> Steal and resteal .. ALL THE TIME ??? =A0 Scooter puhleeeze!!!!!!
You just wait for premium hands, old-timer. It's more restful.
And all the time is hyperbole; look it up.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 06:43:45
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 6:29=A0pm, Deadmoney Walking <tbones...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 12, 12:01=A0pm, Will in New Haven
>
>
>
>
>
> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 11:25=A0am, funky cold medina <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrot=
e:
>
> > > > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wro=
te:
>
> > > > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracele=
t
> > > > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final=
table
> > > > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey mov=
e after
> > > > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first =
few
> > > > > > minutes of it.
>
> > > > > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I k=
now very
> > > > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker god=
s were
> > > > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > > > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he calle=
d an
> > > > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he calle=
d an
> > > > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the riv=
er).
> > > > > And so on.
>
> > > > No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT.=
=A0Against
> > > > short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> > > > Fell
> > > > --
> > > > "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> > > > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> > > > -------=A0
> > > > RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
>
> > > Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s tha=
n
> > > A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose=
by
> > > waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by gettin=
g
> > > it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> > > that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> > Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> > that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> > least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> > luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> > when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> > when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> > or the sand, to look you up.
>
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> > > Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> > > some motivation.
>
> > > Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. =A0But he *did* get lucky an=
d
> > > have it in bad yet come out on top. =A0If you want to justify every p=
lay
> > > because he was the big stack, =A0well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> > > Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I don't call restealing luck and don't think that that's what you
> meant. =A0It was his skill in the bubble and earlier that allowed him to
> get a large chip lead so he could go into coinflips comfortably.- Hide qu=
oted text -
I wasn't talking about Raymer concerning resteals and steals. I was
talking about what Gus Hanson pointed out in _Every Hand Revealed_ He
won the Ausralian Million and part of the reason was his good luck
that none of his opponents had a hand when he made his many, many
steals on air. That is another kind of invisible luck that doesn't
mean that _you_ got cards but means someone else didn't.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:56:52
From: funky cold medina
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 10:03=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 12 2009 11:25 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final t=
able
> > > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey move =
after
> > > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first fe=
w
> > > > > minutes of it.
>
> > > > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I kno=
w very
> > > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker gods =
were
> > > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he called =
an
> > > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he called =
an
> > > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river=
).
> > > > And so on.
>
> > > No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. =
=A0Against
> > > short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> > > Fell
> > > --
> > > "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> > > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> > Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> > A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose b=
y
> > waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> > it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> > that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> > Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> > some motivation.
>
> > Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. =A0But he *did* get lucky and
> > have it in bad yet come out on top. =A0If you want to justify every pla=
y
> > because he was the big stack, =A0well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> > Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
>
> Now who's being silly?
>
> Fell
> --
> "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 08:24:39
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 11:56 PM, funky cold medina wrote:
> Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
Fell
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:14:59
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 10:24 AM, FellKnight wrote:
> On Feb 12 2009 11:56 PM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
>
> Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
>
> Fell
> --
> "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
TRANSLATION .. "NOPE , BROKE and couldnt beg any money this time "
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:28:03
From: XaQ Morphy
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 5:14 PM, FangBanger wrote:
> > Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
>
> TRANSLATION .. "NOPE , BROKE and couldnt beg any money this time "
Uhh, no. More like he's infiltrating the north pole to save Santa's
workshop from the recent penguin surge in Nunavut.
---
Morphy
xaqmorphy@donkeymanifesto.com
http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
"I think they are mad that i am borderline psycho" --igotskillz
"It's unfortunate that there are loons on both sides completely
obfuscating what's going on." --Official RGP Mantra
---
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:25:05
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 6:14 PM, FangBanger wrote:
> On Feb 13 2009 10:24 AM, FellKnight wrote:
>
> > On Feb 12 2009 11:56 PM, funky cold medina wrote:
> >
> > > Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
> >
> > Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
> >
> > Fell
> > --
> > "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> TRANSLATION .. "NOPE , BROKE and couldnt beg any money this time "
lol, moron.
Fell
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
----
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 18:26:29
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"FangBanger" <a29bed1@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:jgbh66x8hm.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Feb 13 2009 10:24 AM, FellKnight wrote:
>
>> On Feb 12 2009 11:56 PM, funky cold medina wrote:
>>
>> > Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
>>
>> Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
>>
>> Fell
>> --
>> "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
>> - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> TRANSLATION .. "NOPE , BROKE and couldnt beg any money this time "
You're sooo far off base it's not funny!
What's really going on is this:
Fell has been trying to track down Russ, but anyone
who knows Russ can tell you that his mail is forwarded
between multiple PO boxes, he'll never tell you where
he's currently residing, and he's a very hard man to find!
After coming up with zilch in his meetings with the
tooth fairy and easter bunny, Fell decided on a roadtrip
to visit the man in red! I'm pretty sure that's where he's
heading now. If the man in red doesn't know where
Russ is hiding, NOBODY does!!!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 16:26:30
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 13 2009 6:26 PM, Mark B [Diputsur] wrote:
> "FangBanger" <a29bed1@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:jgbh66x8hm.ln2@recgroups.com...
> > On Feb 13 2009 10:24 AM, FellKnight wrote:
> >
> >> On Feb 12 2009 11:56 PM, funky cold medina wrote:
> >>
> >> > Alright, alright. OT: Playing any of the FTOPS events?
> >>
> >> Nah, going away tomorrow for 5 weeks, been very busy.
> >>
> >> Fell
> >> --
> >> "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> >> - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
> >
> > TRANSLATION .. "NOPE , BROKE and couldnt beg any money this time "
>
> You're sooo far off base it's not funny!
> What's really going on is this:
>
> Fell has been trying to track down Russ, but anyone
> who knows Russ can tell you that his mail is forwarded
> between multiple PO boxes, he'll never tell you where
> he's currently residing, and he's a very hard man to find!
>
> After coming up with zilch in his meetings with the
> tooth fairy and easter bunny, Fell decided on a roadtrip
> to visit the man in red! I'm pretty sure that's where he's
> heading now. If the man in red doesn't know where
> Russ is hiding, NOBODY does!!!
lolol
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
_____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:37:43
From: funky cold medina
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 9:01=A0am, Will in New Haven
<bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote:
>
> Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> or the sand, to look you up.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
Yeah. Well put. I don't really disagree with you guys. Not my
intent to be petty and knock the man, I have the utmost respect for
what he was able to accomplish - and to top it off he seems like a
humble and good natured player. Which is kinda uncommon.
Just wanted to illustrate that he ran pretty god damn well. And that
helps. A lot.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 00:25:24
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:37:43 -0800 (PST), funky cold medina
<kellywong74@yahoo.com > wrote:
>On Feb 12, 9:01 am, Will in New Haven
><bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>>
>> Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
>> that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
>> least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
>> luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
>> when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
>> when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
>> or the sand, to look you up.
>>
>> --
>> Will in New Haven
>
>Yeah. Well put. I don't really disagree with you guys. Not my
>intent to be petty and knock the man, I have the utmost respect for
>what he was able to accomplish - and to top it off he seems like a
>humble and good natured player. Which is kinda uncommon.
>
>Just wanted to illustrate that he ran pretty god damn well. And that
>helps. A lot.
If you win the Main Event, it is more or less a necessity. You have
to win your coin flips. You probably have to suck out a couple times.
And you have to NOT get unlucky the scores of times you're in it with
the best of it.
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 17:34:39
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 3:34=A0pm, A Man Beaten by Jacks <nob...@fool.foo > wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:25:41 -0800 (PST), funky cold medina
>
> <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> >A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
> >waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> >it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> >that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
> >Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> >some motivation.
> >Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. =A0But he *did* get lucky and
> >have it in bad yet come out on top. =A0If you want to justify every play
> >because he was the big stack, =A0well hell --> ATC it every hand.
> >Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
>
> A short stack who is playing properly is going to be jamming a pretty
> wide range of hands. =A0Throw in the dead money from the blinds and
> antes, and you can profitably take the wrong end of a coin flip
> against a wide range of hands when your own hand is at least
> reasonable. =A0If I recall that hand correctly, assigning the shorty a
> reasonable range, Raymer made the right play. =A0I remember having
> thought it was a bad play before examining it. =A0
But people always judge plays by what the opponent actually has, not
the distribution of hands he might have had. They think a great poker
player peers into your soul and makes a great call or a fabulous
laydown. if that were the case, I'd be invincible because I don't even
HAVE a soul.
If you get it in with Tens when your opponent would not be playing
horribly to move in with any pair and any Ace, you haven't made a bad
play when he turns up with Jacks (or Aces) and you haven't made a
brilliant play if he turns up with Nines or Ace-five suited.
Of course, if you get a better read or a tell and you can narrow his
range further, that's great.
--
Will in New Haven
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 15:29:20
From: Deadmoney Walking
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 12:01=A0pm, Will in New Haven
<bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote:
> On Feb 12, 11:25=A0am, funky cold medina <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final t=
able
> > > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey move =
after
> > > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first fe=
w
> > > > > minutes of it.
>
> > > > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I kno=
w very
> > > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker gods =
were
> > > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he called =
an
> > > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he called =
an
> > > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river=
).
> > > > And so on.
>
> > > No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. =
=A0Against
> > > short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> > > Fell
> > > --
> > > "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> > > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> > > -------=A0
> > > RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
>
> > Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> > A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose b=
y
> > waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> > it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> > that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> or the sand, to look you up.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
>
>
>
>
>
> > Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> > some motivation.
>
> > Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. =A0But he *did* get lucky and
> > have it in bad yet come out on top. =A0If you want to justify every pla=
y
> > because he was the big stack, =A0well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> > Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't call restealing luck and don't think that that's what you
meant. It was his skill in the bubble and earlier that allowed him to
get a large chip lead so he could go into coinflips comfortably.
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 12:43:07
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
Mav, we finally agree on something.
On Feb 11, 2:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
>
> > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =EF=BF=BDGreg made donkey move af=
ter
> donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> minutes of it.
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 09:01:36
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 11:25=A0am, funky cold medina <kellywon...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
>
> > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final tab=
le
> > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey move af=
ter
> > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > > > minutes of it.
>
> > > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I know =
very
> > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker gods we=
re
> > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he called an
> > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he called an
> > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> > > And so on.
>
> > No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. =A0=
Against
> > short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> > Fell
> > --
> > "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> > -------=A0
> > RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
>
> Trivial? =A0Eh. =A0I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> A10. =A0In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
> waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> it all-in pre-flop). =A0I also recall there being more suckouts than
> that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
or the sand, to look you up.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> some motivation.
>
> Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. =A0But he *did* get lucky and
> have it in bad yet come out on top. =A0If you want to justify every play
> because he was the big stack, =A0well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 16:41:56
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 11:01 AM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Feb 12, 11:25 am, funky cold medina <kellywon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 5:50 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 11, 2:53 pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> >
> > > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
> >
> > > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> > > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. Greg made donkey move after
> > > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > > > > minutes of it.
> >
> > > > I like him. (But god damn those glasses were annoying). I know very
> > > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. Poker gods were
> > > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > > slight, but a big underdog. First hand of the that FT he called an
> > > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). Later he called an
> > > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> > > > And so on.
> >
> > > No, not "and so on". Those were the only two suckouts of the FT.
Against
> > > short stacks. When he was the big stack. All trivial plays.
> >
> > > Fell
> > > --
> > > "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> > > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
> >
> Trivial? Eh. I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> > A10. In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
> > waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> > it all-in pre-flop). I also recall there being more suckouts than
> > that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> Superficially, those were the only two. The _real_ luck he had was
> that he was anywhere from a slight to a big favorite several times, at
> least eight or nine, and _no one got lucky on him_ That is a kind of
> luck that isn't so spectacular but it is vital to tournament success
> when the blinds get big. Earlier in a tournament the unseen luck comes
> when you can steal or resteal all the time and no one has the cards,
> or the sand, to look you up.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
So correct in the first part of this post and SOOOOOO LAME in the last
sentence.
Steal and resteal .. ALL THE TIME ??? Scooter puhleeeze!!!!!!
>
>
> >
> > Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> > some motivation.
> >
> > Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. But he *did* get lucky and
> > have it in bad yet come out on top. If you want to justify every play
> > because he was the big stack, well hell --> ATC it every hand.
> >
> > Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
_______________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 08:55:54
From: Will in New Haven
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 9:23=A0am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> In article <5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889c...@v18g2000pro.googlegroups=
.com >,
>
> RussGeorg...@aol.com <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Logic states what I'm saying is correct. Perhaps if he'd put more
> >effort into his job, he'd have been a better lawyer.
>
> The mistake you're making here is using your personal priorities
> and motivations and assuming that they apply to someone else.
> A person can be perfectly capable of doing something, and still
> choose not to do so for any number of perfectly valid reasons.
>
> Greg could have had ten million dollars in the bank from his
> dayjob, and still chosen not to invest any more of it in his
> bankroll. =A0I don't know, and neither do you. =A0Maybe he made
> a promise to his wife or his father ten years before that he
> would never do that, and he values that promise more than poker?
> It's certainly possible.
It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
"paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
paycheck money, although they were considerable. He had gone from a
position where he _might_ have invested his own ten grand to one where
he felt he needed in the months right before that WS. However, he was
still ahead of the game, had quite a bit more than he had originally
put in. And he had paid travel expenses and other luxuries from that
bankroll.
He played much better the next year but didn't win it. So Russ is
right that a lot of luck was involved.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> I think maybe you're not doing a good job of reading your opponent
> on this one. =A0Just because you would play the life-hand in a
> particular way doesn't mean everyone else would do the same.
> Don't assume that everyone has the same priorities that you do.
>
> -Patti
>
> P.S. =A0And yes, playing high-variance games on a short bankroll
> is a leak. =A0I completely agree with you on that.
> --
> Patti Beadles, =A0 =A0Oakland, CA
|
| | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:14:17
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Will in New Haven" <bill.reich@taylorandfrancis.com > wrote in message
news:762ecde1-f104-406b-9a8c-
> It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> paycheck money, although they were considerable.
WTF? HE SOLD ROCKS TO FUND HIS PLAY!
You all forget why they called him fossilman?
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 12:14:24
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 10:55 AM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Feb 12, 9:23 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> > In article
<5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889c...@v18g2000pro.googlegroups..com >,
> >
> > RussGeorg...@aol.com <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >Logic states what I'm saying is correct. Perhaps if he'd put more
> > >effort into his job, he'd have been a better lawyer.
> >
> > The mistake you're making here is using your personal priorities
> > and motivations and assuming that they apply to someone else.
> > A person can be perfectly capable of doing something, and still
> > choose not to do so for any number of perfectly valid reasons.
> >
> > Greg could have had ten million dollars in the bank from his
> > dayjob, and still chosen not to invest any more of it in his
> > bankroll. I don't know, and neither do you. Maybe he made
> > a promise to his wife or his father ten years before that he
> > would never do that, and he values that promise more than poker?
> > It's certainly possible.
>
> It isn't just possible, it is what he said. He had put a moderate
> amount, I think it was one thousand dollars, of what I like to call
> "paycheck money" into poker and he was not going to put any more into
> it. This was an agreement with his wife. His bankroll fluctuations
> never put him in a position where he would have to reload from
> paycheck money, although they were considerable. He had gone from a
> position where he _might_ have invested his own ten grand to one where
> he felt he needed in the months right before that WS. However, he was
> still ahead of the game, had quite a bit more than he had originally
> put in. And he had paid travel expenses and other luxuries from that
> bankroll.
>
> He played much better the next year but didn't win it.
Actually he played GREAT till he gained the chip lead in like day 5-6-or
7... then lost his fuckin mind !!
he went down faster than a prom date !!
So Russ is
> right that a lot of luck was involved.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
>
>
> >
> > I think maybe you're not doing a good job of reading your opponent
> > on this one. Just because you would play the life-hand in a
> > particular way doesn't mean everyone else would do the same.
> > Don't assume that everyone has the same priorities that you do.
> >
> > -Patti
> >
> > P.S. And yes, playing high-variance games on a short bankroll
> > is a leak. I completely agree with you on that.
> > --
> > Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 08:25:41
From: funky cold medina
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12, 5:50=A0am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
>
> > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey move afte=
r
> > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > > minutes of it.
>
> > I like him. =A0(But god damn those glasses were annoying). =A0I know ve=
ry
> > few that would call that final table play brilliant. =A0Poker gods were
> > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > slight, but a big underdog. =A0First hand of the that FT he called an
> > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). =A0Later he called an
> > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> > And so on.
>
> No, not "and so on". =A0Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. =A0Ag=
ainst
> short stacks. =A0When he was the big stack. =A0All trivial plays.
>
> Fell
> --
> "Don't underestimate Fell. =A0He's a smart kid."
> - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
>
> -------=A0
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
Trivial? Eh. I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
A10. In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
it all-in pre-flop). I also recall there being more suckouts than
that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
some motivation.
Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. But he *did* get lucky and
have it in bad yet come out on top. If you want to justify every play
because he was the big stack, well hell -- > ATC it every hand.
Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 20:19:16
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 11:25 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> On Feb 12, 5:50 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 11, 2:53 pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> >
> > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
> >
> > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. Greg made donkey move after
> > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > > > minutes of it.
> >
> > > I like him. (But god damn those glasses were annoying). I know very
> > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. Poker gods were
> > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > slight, but a big underdog. First hand of the that FT he called an
> > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). Later he called an
> > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> > > And so on.
> >
> > No, not "and so on". Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. Against
> > short stacks. When he was the big stack. All trivial plays.
> >
> > Fell
> > --
> > "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
> >
> Trivial? Eh. I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> A10. In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
> waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> it all-in pre-flop). I also recall there being more suckouts than
> that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> some motivation.
>
> Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. But he *did* get lucky and
> have it in bad yet come out on top. If you want to justify every play
> because he was the big stack, well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
If he was the big stack then he didn't get it all in.
--------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 15:34:10
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:25:41 -0800 (PST), funky cold medina
<kellywong74@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Trivial? Eh. I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
>A10. In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
>waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
>it all-in pre-flop). I also recall there being more suckouts than
>that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
>some motivation.
>Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. But he *did* get lucky and
>have it in bad yet come out on top. If you want to justify every play
>because he was the big stack, well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
A short stack who is playing properly is going to be jamming a pretty
wide range of hands. Throw in the dead money from the blinds and
antes, and you can profitably take the wrong end of a coin flip
against a wide range of hands when your own hand is at least
reasonable. If I recall that hand correctly, assigning the shorty a
reasonable range, Raymer made the right play. I remember having
thought it was a bad play before examining it.
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 10:03:58
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 11:25 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> On Feb 12, 5:50 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 11, 2:53 pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> >
> > > > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > > > unless he got very unlucky.
> >
> > > > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> > > > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. Greg made donkey move after
> > > > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > > > minutes of it.
> >
> > > I like him. (But god damn those glasses were annoying). I know very
> > > few that would call that final table play brilliant. Poker gods were
> > > smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> > > slight, but a big underdog. First hand of the that FT he called an
> > > all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> > > against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). Later he called an
> > > all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> > > And so on.
> >
> > No, not "and so on". Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. Against
> > short stacks. When he was the big stack. All trivial plays.
> >
> > Fell
> > --
> > "Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
> > - Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
> >
> Trivial? Eh. I'm much more sympathetic to the call with 10s than
> A10. In neither hand was he in the blinds or have anything to lose by
> waiting for a better spot (or have any positional advantage by getting
> it all-in pre-flop). I also recall there being more suckouts than
> that, but I'm too damn lazy to start running searches on it.
>
> Of course, if there was some money on the line - it might serve as
> some motivation.
>
> Ps. Once again, no disrespect to Raymer. But he *did* get lucky and
> have it in bad yet come out on top. If you want to justify every play
> because he was the big stack, well hell --> ATC it every hand.
>
> Fuck it, it's trivial, I'm the big stack.
Now who's being silly?
Fell
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 08:03:05
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 10 2009 6:38 PM, RussGeorgiev@aol.com wrote:
>
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/10a443238c4e7ebe/25d5c2c50b16566f?lnk=gst&q=Greg+Raymer#25d5c2c50b16566f
>
>
>
> Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
> in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
> and would never think of playing poker for a living.
>
> Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
> Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
raymer's respectability and popularity are light years higher than Russ
will ever be . This drives Russ crazy.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
-------
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 01:02:17
From: funky cold medina
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11, 2:53=A0pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
>
> > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > unless he got very unlucky.
>
> Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> repeatedly putting bad beats on others. =A0Greg made donkey move after
> donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> minutes of it.
I like him. (But god damn those glasses were annoying). I know very
few that would call that final table play brilliant. Poker gods were
smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
slight, but a big underdog. First hand of the that FT he called an
all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). Later he called an
all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
And so on.
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 05:50:21
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 12 2009 4:02 AM, funky cold medina wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2:53 pm, Maverick <bretr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 11, 12:21 am, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> >
> > > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > > unless he got very unlucky.
> >
> > Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
> > repeatedly putting bad beats on others. Greg made donkey move after
> > donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
> > minutes of it.
>
> I like him. (But god damn those glasses were annoying). I know very
> few that would call that final table play brilliant. Poker gods were
> smiling on him and he was lucky several hands where has was not a
> slight, but a big underdog. First hand of the that FT he called an
> all-in bet (that I believe was made from UTG) pre-flop and was up
> against AA with 10-10 (and then flopped a set). Later he called an
> all-in with A-10 and was up against AK (hit a straight on the river).
> And so on.
No, not "and so on". Those were the only two suckouts of the FT. Against
short stacks. When he was the big stack. All trivial plays.
Fell
--
"Don't underestimate Fell. He's a smart kid."
- Paul Popinjay, RGP, Nov 15, 2008
-------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 00:08:53
From: Deadmoney Walking
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11, 1:33=A0am, A Man Beaten by Jacks <nob...@fool.foo > wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:19:11 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
>
>
>
>
>
> <jhanki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nob...@fool.foo> wrote in message
> >news:1j94p4psf1dnsgv8rm4qob610ml1fdfj78@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39 -0800 (PST), "RussGeorg...@aol.com"
> >> <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/threa.=
..
> >>>Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
> >>>in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
> >>>and would never think of playing poker for a living.
> >>>Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
> >>>Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
> >> Unlike no-life thieving cheat subhumans like you, he had a wife, and
> >> they sometimes aren't that interested in dropping $10K on a poker
> >> game.
> >Add kids (two of 'em) and it's almost impossible. =A0Several years ago w=
hen we
> >moved I had to live by myself in our old house for about two months to t=
ake
> >care of some business before I joined my family at the new place.
> >It was amazing how frugal I was living by myself and how much money I sa=
ved.
> >I basically just worked all the time and played cards. =A0Didn't have to=
buy
> >any food at all almost since it was provided at the games I played (and
> >really there were snacks and drinks at work) and I used basically just o=
ne
> >room of the house to sleep in, one glass on the kitchen counter to drink
> >from, and I used the same towell to dry off every morning before hanging=
it
> >back on the shower curtain to drip dry.
>
> Yep. =A0And you can generally do this as a single man. =A0If things are
> going great, you can scale up your lifestyle to extravagant. =A0If
> they're going like shit, you live like a dog. =A0No big deal. =A0
>
> Try telling a wife she gets to live like a dog because the tables have
> been tough this week. =A0See how long you stay married.
>
> >All the money I made at work and playing cards I just kept basically sin=
ce
> >we had saved up enough for the move. =A0Cash just accumulated in my pock=
ets
> >because I simply did not ever spend it on anything of any substance
> >(gas,...that's pretty much it).
> >I remember thinking that if I lived like this all the time I could prett=
y
> >much play the main event and about 7-8 other events comfortably every ye=
ar.
>
> Yep. =A0I can't imagine living like this, though. =A0This is card player
> living, and it's not anything fit for humans. =A0A lawyer gets to bill
> their hourly rate no matter how things are going for their clients (at
> least if they're on retainer, an increasingly rare state of affairs).- Hi=
de quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yep, that's me, minus the cash in my pockets.
Although Foxwoods and Mohegan comp us with gasoline.
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 15:14:29
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
Russ is clearly coping with some envy issues this week
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 14:53:38
From: Maverick
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11, 12:21=EF=BF=BDam, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> unless he got very unlucky.
Fortunately for that donkey, he got totally lucky on that final table
repeatedly putting bad beats on others. Greg made donkey move after
donkey move on that FT and should have busted out in the first few
minutes of it.
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 14:33:48
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
I'm dumbfounded. I had no idea he was on Stars playing. Sorry for the
sarcasm, but I'm on the site everyday also. I watch him suckout more
often than hookers in whore houses. It's not mind boggling he isn't
broke, as I'm still under the opinion/knowledge that Stars and Tilt
are rigged.
What better way to pay them than to have them win. Simple explanation,
they're great players, they're supposed to win. That's how I'd pay
those who played on my site and endorsed it
On Feb 11, 2:26=EF=BF=BDpm, "mccard" <no_won@no_won.none > wrote:
> <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889ce6c@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>He won the lottery. Many have won the lottery. Get back to me in a
> >>decade of so.
>
> Greg is on PokerStars most every night grinding it out. =EF=BF=BDI'm sure=
he would
> be pleased to see you at his table. =EF=BF=BDYou might post here when you=
join his
> table, I'm sure many of us would like to observe.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 16:40:35
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
<RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote in message
news:c29c2da4-0789-4107-b1ac-23ca3891551c@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>I'm dumbfounded. I had no idea he was on Stars playing. Sorry for the
>>sarcasm, but I'm on the site everyday also. I watch him suckout more
>>often than hookers in whore houses. It's not mind boggling he isn't
>>broke, as I'm still under the opinion/knowledge that Stars and Tilt
>>are rigged.
>>What better way to pay them than to have them win. Simple explanation,
>>they're great players, they're supposed to win. That's how I'd pay
>>those who played on my site and endorsed it
He and Moneymaker both play quite often. I'm serious, I have watched you
before and would be very interested in watching as you play either of them.
When you do please post here that you are on with them, its easy to find
them on the menu.
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 11:57:17
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
John_Brian_K
I have a very difficult time understanding you. I'm on this site for a
reason. I'm civil with those that are civil with me. I'm not that
uncivil with those I don't like. With you, you're one way one day and
another the next. James Haskins can more than defend himself without
my help. But, he's one of the more credible posters on RGP.
One day you're civil, the next day you want to shoot someone. Take a
lesson from Dave Keiser, switch to his way, the I want to shoot anyone
anytime, anyday. At least you know where's he coming from.
On Feb 11, 11:45=EF=BF=BDam, "John_Brian_K" <a7ec...@webnntp.invalid > wrote=
:
> > and I used the same towell to dry off every morning before hanging it
> > back on the shower curtain to drip dry.
>
> What about when you had to wipe your wet ass? =EF=BF=BDeeeeewwwww
>
> > All the money I made at work and playing cards I just kept basically si=
nce
> > we had saved up enough for the move. =EF=BF=BDCash just accumulated in =
my pockets
> > because I simply did not ever spend it on anything of any substance
> > (gas,...that's pretty much it).
>
> > I remember thinking that if I lived like this all the time I could pret=
ty
> > much play the main event and about 7-8 other events comfortably every y=
ear.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
> nor will =EF=BF=BDI =EF=BF=BDconsider you =EF=BF=BDnecessarily wise =EF=
=BF=BDbecause you are =EF=BF=BDgrave.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> 47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
> JBK
>
> -----=EF=BF=BD
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 13:03:03
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11 2009 2:57 PM, RussGeorgiev@aol.com wrote:
> John_Brian_K
>
> I have a very difficult time understanding you. I'm on this site for a
> reason. I'm civil with those that are civil with me. I'm not that
> uncivil with those I don't like. With you, you're one way one day and
> another the next. James Haskins can more than defend himself without
> my help. But, he's one of the more credible posters on RGP.
>
> One day you're civil, the next day you want to shoot someone. Take a
> lesson from Dave Keiser, switch to his way, the I want to shoot anyone
> anytime, anyday. At least you know where's he coming from.
> > What about when you had to wipe your wet ass? �eeeeewwwww
I was just joking about how he used the towel and then hung it up to dry
and used it again. I was not bashing him. I just thought it was funny.
I have used the same towel before, but thankfully I have not wiped my ass
with it.
lol
It was just a joke Russ. You just missed it, no biggie. I have no
problem with the poster calling himself James Hankins.
And for the record I never said I wanted to shoot anyone (at least
seriously) I have just recently bought a gun and like the idea of being
able to defend myself from people like you.
When I am not boring the shit out of people with my posts about what I did
the other day I typically lurk and make one liners. I do this for
entertainment value (now if anyone gets any actual 'entertainment' out of
it or not who knows)
==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK
_______________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 11:34:15
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
Patti, not an attack, just an observation. A person spends years
becoming a lawyer. This person spends much time playing poker. He has
a high volitility in the game. This is a weakness in the persons game
in itself. A person has trouble being very good at one thing, yet Greg
tries to be good at two. I was great at bowling. Dropped it for poker
instantly. One thing I do know. If he was bring home money from poker,
his wife wouldn't have been saying anything about money. She might
have had gripes about him not spending enough time at home, but not
about his poker playing.
Logic states what I'm saying is correct. Perhaps if he'd put more
effort into his job, he'd have been a better lawyer. If he didn't like
being a lawyer, perhaps he should have become a pro player. Good
players are a dime a dozen, like clas A-AA-AAA ball players. However,
until you're in the majors, theres no money.
He won the lottery. Many have won the lottery. Get back to me in a
decade of so.
On Feb 11, 12:21=EF=BF=BDam, pat...@green.rahul.net (Patti Beadles) wrote:
> In article <49cab83e-89e9-43de-a07b-a0b891a02...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups=
.com >,
>
> RussGeorg...@aol.com <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>
> Actually, Russ, I think you're pretty far off-base on this one.
>
> I've known Greg for years. =EF=BF=BDHe's an extremely solid player, but
> a somewhat high-variance one one who had a habit of overbetting
> his bankroll. =EF=BF=BDWhen he did that and blew out a lot of it at
> the WSOP, he chose to seek backers rather than stepping down
> in limits to rebuild. =EF=BF=BDHe maintained the discipline of keeping
> his bankroll separate from family money, and wanted to continue
> doing so.
>
> I backed Greg. =EF=BF=BDI also had lunch with him before the final
> table started, and I listened to him outline his strategy for
> the day. =EF=BF=BDHe was able to clearly articulate how each person
> would play based on their stack sizes and positions, how they
> would change as stack sizes changed and players busted out,
> and what strategy he would use against each of them.
>
> I've spent countless hours talking to many extremely good
> poker players about such things, and Greg had a better and
> clearer understanding of his table than anyone I've ever known.
> After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> unless he got very unlucky.
>
> -Patti
> --
> Patti Beadles, =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDOakland, CA
|
| | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 14:23:34
From: Patti Beadles
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
In article <5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889ce6c@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com >,
RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote:
>Logic states what I'm saying is correct. Perhaps if he'd put more
>effort into his job, he'd have been a better lawyer.
The mistake you're making here is using your personal priorities
and motivations and assuming that they apply to someone else.
A person can be perfectly capable of doing something, and still
choose not to do so for any number of perfectly valid reasons.
Greg could have had ten million dollars in the bank from his
dayjob, and still chosen not to invest any more of it in his
bankroll. I don't know, and neither do you. Maybe he made
a promise to his wife or his father ten years before that he
would never do that, and he values that promise more than poker?
It's certainly possible.
I think maybe you're not doing a good job of reading your opponent
on this one. Just because you would play the life-hand in a
particular way doesn't mean everyone else would do the same.
Don't assume that everyone has the same priorities that you do.
-Patti
P.S. And yes, playing high-variance games on a short bankroll
is a leak. I completely agree with you on that.
--
Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 15:12:51
From: Mark B [Diputsur]
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"Patti Beadles" <pattib@green.rahul.net > wrote in message
news:gn1bd6$8pj$1@blue.rahul.net...
> In article
> <5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889ce6c@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Logic states what I'm saying is correct. Perhaps if he'd put more
>>effort into his job, he'd have been a better lawyer.
>
> The mistake you're making here is using your personal priorities
> and motivations and assuming that they apply to someone else.
> A person can be perfectly capable of doing something, and still
> choose not to do so for any number of perfectly valid reasons.
>
> Greg could have had ten million dollars in the bank from his
> dayjob, and still chosen not to invest any more of it in his
> bankroll. I don't know, and neither do you. Maybe he made
> a promise to his wife or his father ten years before that he
> would never do that, and he values that promise more than poker?
> It's certainly possible.
Wasn't he the one selling rocks as chip protectors to fund
his play? Lose at the tables, go digging for new rocks, no?
|
| | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 16:26:29
From: mccard
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
<RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote in message
news:5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889ce6c@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>>He won the lottery. Many have won the lottery. Get back to me in a
>>decade of so.
Greg is on PokerStars most every night grinding it out. I'm sure he would
be pleased to see you at his table. You might post here when you join his
table, I'm sure many of us would like to observe.
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 17:37:31
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:26:29 -0600, "mccard" <no_won@no_won.none >
wrote:
><RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:5a48cbf2-f3c7-4246-bc01-c89ac889ce6c@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>>>He won the lottery. Many have won the lottery. Get back to me in a
>>>decade of so.
>Greg is on PokerStars most every night grinding it out. I'm sure he would
>be pleased to see you at his table. You might post here when you join his
>table, I'm sure many of us would like to observe.
I'd sure like to see that. So let me know, please, when Russ is done
swimming a river of shit to play him.
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 11:25:14
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
I've had three wives and the first was 21. The next one was 19, the
next 18. All had new cars every other year, plus more money to spend
than they knew what to do with. None ever worked, plus none ever told
me what to do with gambling. Things never changed moneytarily, as win
or lose, spend or no spend, life was basically always the same. We did
whatever whenever.
I'd always been an animal lover, but my wife brought a puppy home one
day. She went into a 'love animals' phase. Since we lived in a place
that didn't allow animals, I had to spend $5,000 right away to move.
Now, she leaves the puppy for all day excusions and I'm left taking
care of the dog. As is known, I'm a softy for animals. Now I go and
get a friend for the dog, but while in the SPCA, I pass the section
where the cats are. As I walk by, a paw comes out and grabs me. It's a
beautiful kitten, probably about 4 months old. I unhook the claws and
find the animal I want. I now go back to the front.
On the way back, the same cat grabs me in the same manner. WTF? I
watch this cat from a distance for about 10 minutes to see if he does
this to others. He never did this to anyone else. I walk by again, the
cat grabs me again. He had picked me. I get both animals, but have to
wait until the next day.
Meanwhile my wife basically ignores her dog and I'm forced to take
care of it. One night she takes him to a friends. I tell her the dog
must be leashed and taken care of. The dog and I had become best
buddies. The cat and he used to play like kids, with the cat riding
the dog like a jockey.
My wife wasn't a good pet owner and I was a loyal person. I never
threw anyone under the bus that didn't betray me. I kept telling her
to keep the dog leashed when in the care, since he was like a bullet
when the door opened and I didn't want him to get run over.
One night she comes home crying, the dog is in the vets after being
run over as he had jumped out of the car when she opened the door not
having the lease on. This killed me. The vet tried to save the puppy
(almost a year now), but to no avail. Now she starts crying and wants
another dog. The dog looked like a minature Rothweiler, weighing 45
pounds. Off we go to look at puppies, Rothweilers. We find an owner
and see sees a puppy that looks exactly the same, but this one will
grow at least 4 times larger. We buy the dog for $1,000. In two days,
she says he's nothing like Lucky, our old puppy. I took the puppy back
to the original people and didn't ask for any refund, just for them to
find it a good home.
Now, I finally had it with my wife. I tell her she can do whatever she
wants, as we're getting divorced. She's gone all the time (fine with
me) coming back to get money when she runs out. Meanwhile, she finds
another kitten and bring him into the house. Now my cat has a friend
and the dog feels left out. Son, she has two more dogs. Shit hits the
fan, I move or she moves. I give her $25,000 cash to get a place since
she states she wants to move.
I had just bought her a new car, small SUV for the dogs, as she had a
new Mustang Convertable as her first car (all of this is in the 90s).
This wife I married in 1995 and she took driving lessons and got her
first cat in 1996. I bought her second Mustang (6 cylinder) in 1998
and an SUV in 2000. I also loved the other dog, a small female, but
now she has two other dogs and the female likes playing with them, so
she runs with them.
In 2001, I leave Los Angeles, buying a new SUV just prior. Take my
cats, computers and some clothes as my death threats were real.
Later, I come back and get the dog and bring her up to a great home to
a couple that just lost their pet to old age.
Animals are the helpless ones. Most people are liars. I might be many
other things, but being a liar is not one of them. In the gambling
world I have my word. Without your word in gambling, you're nothing.
If anything has hindered me is having four cats over the past 10
years, though 2 are less than 5 years old. I couldn't leave them, as I
know what would happen to them.
My house would make a great Animal Channel house for cats, since I
spent about $10,000 of ramps and poles for the cats to run all over
the house overhead. I ever had the patio chicken wired so they could
go outside whenever they wanted. It's a outdoor area with a wooden
floor about 400 square feet. Here they look other animals on the other
side, including raccons, possums and cats and dogs.
One thing about animal, I don't get any BS from them, though all are
like children who never grow up. They all have distinct personalities.
On Feb 10, 5:14=EF=BF=BDpm, A Man Beaten by Jacks <nob...@fool.foo > wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39 -0800 (PST), "RussGeorg...@aol.com"
>
> <RussGeorg...@aol.com> wrote:
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/threa...
> >Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
> >in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
> >and would never think of playing poker for a living.
> >Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
> >Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
>
> Unlike no-life thieving cheat subhumans like you, he had a wife, and
> they sometimes aren't that interested in dropping $10K on a poker
> game. =EF=BF=BD
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 08:21:11
From: Patti Beadles
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
In article <49cab83e-89e9-43de-a07b-a0b891a02a39@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com >,
RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote:
>Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
Actually, Russ, I think you're pretty far off-base on this one.
I've known Greg for years. He's an extremely solid player, but
a somewhat high-variance one one who had a habit of overbetting
his bankroll. When he did that and blew out a lot of it at
the WSOP, he chose to seek backers rather than stepping down
in limits to rebuild. He maintained the discipline of keeping
his bankroll separate from family money, and wanted to continue
doing so.
I backed Greg. I also had lunch with him before the final
table started, and I listened to him outline his strategy for
the day. He was able to clearly articulate how each person
would play based on their stack sizes and positions, how they
would change as stack sizes changed and players busted out,
and what strategy he would use against each of them.
I've spent countless hours talking to many extremely good
poker players about such things, and Greg had a better and
clearer understanding of his table than anyone I've ever known.
After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
unless he got very unlucky.
-Patti
--
Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 20:36:39
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11 2009 2:21 AM, Patti Beadles wrote:
> In article
<49cab83e-89e9-43de-a07b-a0b891a02a39@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com >,
> RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>
> Actually, Russ, I think you're pretty far off-base on this one.
>
> I've known Greg for years. He's an extremely solid player, but
> a somewhat high-variance one one who had a habit of overbetting
> his bankroll. When he did that and blew out a lot of it at
> the WSOP, he chose to seek backers rather than stepping down
> in limits to rebuild. He maintained the discipline of keeping
> his bankroll separate from family money, and wanted to continue
> doing so.
>
> I backed Greg. I also had lunch with him before the final
> table started, and I listened to him outline his strategy for
> the day. He was able to clearly articulate how each person
> would play based on their stack sizes and positions, how they
> would change as stack sizes changed and players busted out,
> and what strategy he would use against each of them.
>
> I've spent countless hours talking to many extremely good
> poker players about such things, and Greg had a better and
> clearer understanding of his table than anyone I've ever known.
> After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> unless he got very unlucky.
>
> -Patti
> --
> Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 06:34:50
From: greystoke9
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
Greg Raymer is a class act, and an EXCELLENT poker player. Why Russ, do
you decide to go on the attack sometimes? What did Raymer ever do to you?
On Feb 11 2009 3:21 AM, Patti Beadles wrote:
> In article
<49cab83e-89e9-43de-a07b-a0b891a02a39@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com >,
> RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>
> Actually, Russ, I think you're pretty far off-base on this one.
>
> I've known Greg for years. He's an extremely solid player, but
> a somewhat high-variance one one who had a habit of overbetting
> his bankroll. When he did that and blew out a lot of it at
> the WSOP, he chose to seek backers rather than stepping down
> in limits to rebuild. He maintained the discipline of keeping
> his bankroll separate from family money, and wanted to continue
> doing so.
>
> I backed Greg. I also had lunch with him before the final
> table started, and I listened to him outline his strategy for
> the day. He was able to clearly articulate how each person
> would play based on their stack sizes and positions, how they
> would change as stack sizes changed and players busted out,
> and what strategy he would use against each of them.
>
> I've spent countless hours talking to many extremely good
> poker players about such things, and Greg had a better and
> clearer understanding of his table than anyone I've ever known.
> After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> unless he got very unlucky.
>
> -Patti
> --
> Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 08:05:08
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Feb 11 2009 8:34 AM, greystoke9 wrote:
> Greg Raymer is a class act, and an EXCELLENT poker player. Why Russ, do
> you decide to go on the attack sometimes? What did Raymer ever do to you?
Russ is the Terrell Owens of the poker world .. If anyone gets any "good
press", it drives Russ crazy.
HE CANNOT STAND IT !!
>
>
> On Feb 11 2009 3:21 AM, Patti Beadles wrote:
>
> > In article
> <49cab83e-89e9-43de-a07b-a0b891a02a39@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> > RussGeorgiev@aol.com <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
> >
> > Actually, Russ, I think you're pretty far off-base on this one.
> >
> > I've known Greg for years. He's an extremely solid player, but
> > a somewhat high-variance one one who had a habit of overbetting
> > his bankroll. When he did that and blew out a lot of it at
> > the WSOP, he chose to seek backers rather than stepping down
> > in limits to rebuild. He maintained the discipline of keeping
> > his bankroll separate from family money, and wanted to continue
> > doing so.
> >
> > I backed Greg. I also had lunch with him before the final
> > table started, and I listened to him outline his strategy for
> > the day. He was able to clearly articulate how each person
> > would play based on their stack sizes and positions, how they
> > would change as stack sizes changed and players busted out,
> > and what strategy he would use against each of them.
> >
> > I've spent countless hours talking to many extremely good
> > poker players about such things, and Greg had a better and
> > clearer understanding of his table than anyone I've ever known.
> > After lunch, I was dead certain that he would win the bracelet
> > unless he got very unlucky.
> >
> > -Patti
> > --
> > Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 11:48:12
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 06:34:50 -0800, "greystoke9"
<greystoke9@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Greg Raymer is a class act, and an EXCELLENT poker player. Why Russ, do
>you decide to go on the attack sometimes? What did Raymer ever do to you?
Because Russ is a mammoth douchebag whose jealousy of any actual human
with a real life outside of cards is manifestly evident. It's
pathetic and disgusting, like stepping on a slug in bare feet.
Poor Russ. Too bad he never had a life. Guess it's too late for him
now.
|
| |
Date: 10 Feb 2009 20:14:46
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39 -0800 (PST), "RussGeorgiev@aol.com"
<RussGeorgiev@aol.com > wrote:
>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/10a443238c4e7ebe/25d5c2c50b16566f?lnk=gst&q=Greg+Raymer#25d5c2c50b16566f
>Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
>in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
>and would never think of playing poker for a living.
>Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
Unlike no-life thieving cheat subhumans like you, he had a wife, and
they sometimes aren't that interested in dropping $10K on a poker
game.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Feb 2009 23:19:11
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo > wrote in message
news:1j94p4psf1dnsgv8rm4qob610ml1fdfj78@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39 -0800 (PST), "RussGeorgiev@aol.com"
> <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/10a443238c4e7ebe/25d5c2c50b16566f?lnk=gst&q=Greg+Raymer#25d5c2c50b16566f
>
>>Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
>>in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
>>and would never think of playing poker for a living.
>
>>Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>>Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
>
> Unlike no-life thieving cheat subhumans like you, he had a wife, and
> they sometimes aren't that interested in dropping $10K on a poker
> game.
Add kids (two of 'em) and it's almost impossible. Several years ago when we
moved I had to live by myself in our old house for about two months to take
care of some business before I joined my family at the new place.
It was amazing how frugal I was living by myself and how much money I saved.
I basically just worked all the time and played cards. Didn't have to buy
any food at all almost since it was provided at the games I played (and
really there were snacks and drinks at work) and I used basically just one
room of the house to sleep in, one glass on the kitchen counter to drink
from, and I used the same towell to dry off every morning before hanging it
back on the shower curtain to drip dry.
All the money I made at work and playing cards I just kept basically since
we had saved up enough for the move. Cash just accumulated in my pockets
because I simply did not ever spend it on anything of any substance
(gas,...that's pretty much it).
I remember thinking that if I lived like this all the time I could pretty
much play the main event and about 7-8 other events comfortably every year.
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 11:45:28
From: John_Brian_K
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
> and I used the same towell to dry off every morning before hanging it
> back on the shower curtain to drip dry.
What about when you had to wipe your wet ass? eeeeewwwww
> All the money I made at work and playing cards I just kept basically since
> we had saved up enough for the move. Cash just accumulated in my pockets
> because I simply did not ever spend it on anything of any substance
> (gas,...that's pretty much it).
>
> I remember thinking that if I lived like this all the time I could pretty
> much play the main event and about 7-8 other events comfortably every year.
==========================================
You must not think me necessarily foolish because I am facetious,
nor will I consider you necessarily wise because you are grave.
==============================
47.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
JBK
-----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 01:33:42
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:19:11 -0600, "James L. Hankins"
<jhankins5@cox.net > wrote:
>"A Man Beaten by Jacks" <nobody@fool.foo> wrote in message
>news:1j94p4psf1dnsgv8rm4qob610ml1fdfj78@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:38:39 -0800 (PST), "RussGeorgiev@aol.com"
>> <RussGeorgiev@aol.com> wrote:
>>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/10a443238c4e7ebe/25d5c2c50b16566f?lnk=gst&q=Greg+Raymer#25d5c2c50b16566f
>>>Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
>>>in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
>>>and would never think of playing poker for a living.
>>>Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
>>>Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
>> Unlike no-life thieving cheat subhumans like you, he had a wife, and
>> they sometimes aren't that interested in dropping $10K on a poker
>> game.
>Add kids (two of 'em) and it's almost impossible. Several years ago when we
>moved I had to live by myself in our old house for about two months to take
>care of some business before I joined my family at the new place.
>It was amazing how frugal I was living by myself and how much money I saved.
>I basically just worked all the time and played cards. Didn't have to buy
>any food at all almost since it was provided at the games I played (and
>really there were snacks and drinks at work) and I used basically just one
>room of the house to sleep in, one glass on the kitchen counter to drink
>from, and I used the same towell to dry off every morning before hanging it
>back on the shower curtain to drip dry.
Yep. And you can generally do this as a single man. If things are
going great, you can scale up your lifestyle to extravagant. If
they're going like shit, you live like a dog. No big deal.
Try telling a wife she gets to live like a dog because the tables have
been tough this week. See how long you stay married.
>All the money I made at work and playing cards I just kept basically since
>we had saved up enough for the move. Cash just accumulated in my pockets
>because I simply did not ever spend it on anything of any substance
>(gas,...that's pretty much it).
>I remember thinking that if I lived like this all the time I could pretty
>much play the main event and about 7-8 other events comfortably every year.
Yep. I can't imagine living like this, though. This is card player
living, and it's not anything fit for humans. A lawyer gets to bill
their hourly rate no matter how things are going for their clients (at
least if they're on retainer, an increasingly rare state of affairs).
|
| |
Date: 10 Feb 2009 17:11:28
From: Bill T
Subject: Re: Greg Raymer---JOKE---Russ G
|
On 2/10/2009 16:38, RussGeorgiev@aol.com wrote:
> Here he is until he hit the lottery. Getting an endorsement from Dying
> in Greenbay is quite touching. F*ck, every lawyer I know is well off
> and would never think of playing poker for a living.
A lot of lawyers, like many other workers, don't like their jobs.
>
> Here's one that barely makes enough where he can't back himself.
> Should have worked at Burger King, perhaps they pay more?
Naw, at the time he was gainfully employed at a big company.
Bill
|
|
