| |
Main
Date: 19 Dec 2006 13:52:39
From: Zidane Valor
Subject: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
since then is enough proof for me.
____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 03:35:10
From: Tate and Lyle
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
As poker is a game of luck how can anyone possible be 'best' at it?
Luckiest maybe. Best no.
"Zidane Valor" <ad202a1@webnntp.invalid > wrote in message
news:7i3m54x8ue.ln2@recgroups.com...
>I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
> since then is enough proof for me.
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> * kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
>
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 09:36:02
From: Bronzedodger
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
On Dec 19 2006 10:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
> As poker is a game of luck how can anyone possible be 'best' at it?
> Luckiest maybe. Best no.
Same way I'm the best slots player in the Western Hemisphere, bar none.
Get it...'bar' none...didn't think so.
____________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 09:10:58
From: phlash74
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
On Dec 20, 3:21 am, TheFleece <43084...@recpoker.com > wrote:
> On Dec 20 2006 1:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
>
> > As poker is a game of luck how can anyone possible be 'best' at it?
> > Luckiest maybe. Best no.It's a funny thing about poker players and the general public opinion of them.
> Greg Raymer pulled some very dicey moves in 2004 that paid off handsomely
> (although he was generally an underdog) and he's 'a great big stack player'. In
> 2006 Jamie Gold managed a big stack in a way most people could only dream about
> and he's derided for being lucky. Objectively there is little difference in how
> 'well' they played.
> Food for thought: If Allen Cunningham had sat in Jamie's seat through the
> tournament and played exactly the same way would he be credited with brilliance
> instead of luck? Credited for 'making the best of good situation' instead of
> being a suckout luckbox? Of course he would.
>
>
>
> > "Zidane Valor" wrote in message
> >news:7i3m54x8ue.ln2@recgroups.com...
> > >I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
> > > since then is enough proof for me._______________________________________________________________
> Your Online Poker Community -http://www.recpoker.com
I didn't say anything negative about Gold's play. He played the big
stack as well as anyone ever has. It's kind of a given that the winner
of a tournament with that many players is going to be lucky, not just
in getting good cards but mainly in avoiding bad beats. I watched the
replay of the 2004 ME final table with Raymer's commentary, and he
claimed that he took only two bad beats the whole tournament (one was
Harrington with middle pair against Raymer's TPTK at the final table),
and gave out only two (both at the final table, eliminating Mike
McClain with TT vs AA and Mattias Andersson with AT vs AK). In the
footage from this year, I only recall Gold taking one bad beat (at the
final table, he had top pair with a better kicker than Paul Wasicka
with 6 or 7 players left, Wasicka moved all-in and spiked his kicker on
the river). He said in an interview that he took a couple beats on day
one that drove his stack down to $3000 before he started making some
hands and building his stack up quickly. Gold did a great job of
getting people to do what he wanted them to, playing on their desire to
move up the pay ladder rather than accumulate chips with the goal of
winning the tournament. His biggest advantage was that none of the
other players ever really took him seriously, they all thought that
they could outplay him despite his monster chip lead.
Gold is kind of like Josh Arieh, in that no one wants to give him
credit because of the way he came across on TV.
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 18:22:03
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
On 20 Dec 2006 09:10:58 -0800, "phlash74" <phlash74@msn.com > wrote:
>Gold is kind of like Josh Arieh, in that no one wants to give him
>credit because of the way he came across on TV.
I didn't give Arieh much credit either before he laid down that king high
flush against John Murphy's boat. That was brilliant. (And if you watched that
on ESPN, the morons acted like it was a great play by Murphy.)
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 05:32:12
From: Special K
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
AstutoZorro@cardplayer.com wrote:
> TheFleece wrote:
> > On Dec 20 2006 1:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
>
> Luck! I think you could've won the main event with run of cards Gold
> got. It doesnt take away from his skills but anyone could've won the
> way he was hitting at the end.
Not true. Granted, he got good cards at the right time, but he always
talked people into folding when he was beat, and talked them into
calling when he had the best hand. That is not luck. The ESPN
coverage showed several hands where Gold got an opp. to fold a superior
hand.
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 22:03:40
From: Tate and Lyle
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
"Special K" <keiths@ccomm.com > wrote in message
news:1166621532.912783.147780@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> AstutoZorro@cardplayer.com wrote:
>> TheFleece wrote:
>> > On Dec 20 2006 1:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
>>
>> Luck! I think you could've won the main event with run of cards Gold
>> got. It doesnt take away from his skills but anyone could've won the
>> way he was hitting at the end.
>
> Not true. Granted, he got good cards at the right time, but he always
> talked people into folding when he was beat, and talked them into
> calling when he had the best hand. That is not luck. The ESPN
> coverage showed several hands where Gold got an opp. to fold a superior
> hand.
So? There is nothing unique about that.
I doubt they would have folded if they had the nuts.
>
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 05:05:01
From:
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
TheFleece wrote:
> On Dec 20 2006 1:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
.
> Food for thought: If Allen Cunningham had sat in Jamie's seat through the
> tournament and played exactly the same way would he be credited with brilliance
> instead of luck?
Luck! I think you could've won the main event with run of cards Gold
got. It doesnt take away from his skills but anyone could've won the
way he was hitting at the end.
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 11:21:14
From: TheFleece
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
On Dec 20 2006 1:35 PM, Tate and Lyle wrote:
> As poker is a game of luck how can anyone possible be 'best' at it?
> Luckiest maybe. Best no.
>
It's a funny thing about poker players and the general public opinion of them.
Greg Raymer pulled some very dicey moves in 2004 that paid off handsomely
(although he was generally an underdog) and he's 'a great big stack player'. In
2006 Jamie Gold managed a big stack in a way most people could only dream about
and he's derided for being lucky. Objectively there is little difference in how
'well' they played.
Food for thought: If Allen Cunningham had sat in Jamie's seat through the
tournament and played exactly the same way would he be credited with brilliance
instead of luck? Credited for 'making the best of good situation' instead of
being a suckout luckbox? Of course he would.
>
> "Zidane Valor" wrote in message
> news:7i3m54x8ue.ln2@recgroups.com...
> >I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
> > since then is enough proof for me.
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 14:07:42
From: Raider Fan
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
On Dec 19 2006 3:52 PM, Zidane Valor wrote:
> I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
> since then is enough proof for me.
I'd say Raymer is better. He took a really bad beat close to the final
table the year after he won it.
-----
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 23:07:04
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Is Hachem the best WSOP Champion of the last few years?
|
It's simply amazing when people talk about things they have little idea
about. Play high stakes for a living for 10 years or more and you'll
realize you have NO CLUE.
Russ Georgiev
www.pokermafia.com
Zidane Valor wrote:
> I say yes since Chris Ferguson/Juan Carlos Mortensen. Four final tables
> since then is enough proof for me.
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> * kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
|
