Don't think you slid it past us, Fossilman.....

[Daliman]

We noticed the fish shirt. You ain't fooling anyone. Didn't see the raise amount you made with the 2nd 89, but were the pot odds there?

P.S. Love ya man, but you blew all your chips off with 2x 89 and T9. Pot odds only go so far, and I'm not sure you had them in every instance for the standard opposing hands. Actually kinda disappointed in yer performance, but hey, WTF do i know.

P.P.S. I gotta admit, seeing her on tonight's show, if I met up with Annie, it could be a bit delicate....

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
We noticed the fish shirt. You ain't fooling anyone. Didn't see the raise amount you made with the 2nd 89, but were the pot odds there?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder about the pot odds. I doubt it on the second one.

And he just made another mistake, IMO.

Oh, well.

[illguitar]

I was actually very impressed by Greg's play. He is just now becoming a professional poker player and he sat down with 9 of the best in the world. I think that he maybe could have played better, but remember that he was up against Annie who had to show down some questionable all-ins of her own. I thought that the Fossilman was quite impressive. I could see that he was a good player in the main event, but when I began to read his posts I saw that he is trluy world-class. My roommates gave me the "he's another Moneymaker, good but lucky" talk about how he didn't stand a chance in the TOC. I politely responded that my opinion differed. Maybe somethings didn't look perfect on TV, but a player of his caliber has to explain nothing to me. It's not like we get an in-depth look at what is happening at the table the whole. And I know Norman Chad isn't talking about position and tendencies. Good Work Fossilman. I think that if he plays at that table 10 times, he wins at least once. That is saying A LOT!

-Dave

[screw "the crew"]

Also, he was trying to play off the other players thinking he would play tight---also if you're getting decent pot-odds in a winner take-all tournament you gotta take them---I thought Greg played pretty well tonight

[KanigawaCards7]

I honestly wouldnt want to play against Annie Duke anymore. Shes a scary player.Never viewed her that seriously before

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
We noticed the fish shirt. You ain't fooling anyone. Didn't see the raise amount you made with the 2nd 89, but were the pot odds there?

P.S. Love ya man, but you blew all your chips off with 2x 89 and T9. Pot odds only go so far, and I'm not sure you had them in every instance for the standard opposing hands. Actually kinda disappointed in yer performance, but hey, WTF do i know.

P.P.S. I gotta admit, seeing her on tonight's show, if I met up with Annie, it could be a bit delicate....

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't really go for white women much, but me and Annie could chill and do some things if she was'nt married. it was refreshing to see a flower petal at the table among the crabgrass. she seems like cool peoples to me. she performed beautifully.

[Daliman]

Aren't you a chick?

[aphoward]

[ QUOTE ]
but me and Annie could chill and do some things if she was'nt married.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then it seems unfortunate (maybe) for her that she isn't married, I'm sure she has higher standards than some random internet forum guy. Like $2 million higher standards /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Congrats Annie!

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Aren't you a chick?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the same thing for a long time, with the name Desdia and all, but no, he is not a chick, genetically speaking. He has a girlfriend whom he constantly refers to (for bad poker advice).

[Daliman]

ya, i guess the name lends itself to femaleness.

[Annie Duke]

I think Greg played fantastic. ESPN is not good aobut showing pot odds and Greg was getting good prices both times. Also, they don't show the hnad in between big showdowns. Greg was chopping really nicely to get that big chip lead. I was really impressed. Plus--he is a true gentleman. An incredible breath of fresh air at the table.

In the heads up match with Phil they missed a lot of hands as well. I went from a 2 to 1 chip deficit after the hand we we both had 333 to the lead by check raise blussinf him about 4 times in a row. That is what he was mumbling aobut after he lost. They just all of a sudden showed me with the lead when the K9 hand happened with no explanation of how I got it.

Be careful of how you jusge Raymer based on the hands ESPN depicted. He really was chopping a lot of pots and placing aggression really well. He totally deserves to be World Champion and based on his table demeanor I couldn't imagine many better representatives of poker than him.

Annie

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
In the heads up match with Phil they missed a lot of hands as well. I went from a 2 to 1 chip deficit after the hand we we both had 333 to the lead by check raise blussinf him about 4 times in a row. That is what he was mumbling aobut after he lost. They just all of a sudden showed me with the lead when the K9 hand happened with no explanation of how I got it.

Annie

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh.... K9s hand makes perfect sense now. Wish ESPN showed those hands. Meh. :/ You never see those nice little blind steals and flop steals that aren't called on TV (bread and butter of poker).

Nice job showing the nine there, think you got Phil that time (do you?), and either way, it was classic.

[Annie Duke]

I think I got Phil a tad tilted ;-)

Annie

[Tyler Durden]

Hey Annie, any idea why your bro doesn't post here? Think you could get him to start?

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
ya, i guess the name lends itself to femaleness.

[/ QUOTE ]

'Des' is short for my first name DESTIN (as in Destiny or Destin, Florida). 'Dia' is short for my last name DIARRA, which is West African and means 'A Gift' or 'A Gift from GOD'(all praises to to the birthplace of civilization and the human race, baby).

and since we're on the subject of femaleness, i'm sure you, Sponger, and your ancestors can trace your family tree back to Africa and a BLACK WOMAN (Queen Mother Earth). say it loud, I'M BLACK AND I'M PROUD!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

oh BTW, good luck on building your BR back. why don't you come play a few $5 + $.50 SNGs on Stars. i'll keep the light on for ya.

DESTIN DIARRA- Desdia72

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Aren't you a chick?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the same thing for a long time, with the name Desdia and all, but no, he is not a chick, genetically speaking. He has a girlfriend whom he constantly refers to (for bad poker advice).

[/ QUOTE ]

Sponger, the next time you're sitting down drinking Millers with the good 'ole boys and sharing an introspective moment, tell them you just found out WHERE your family tree starts. then tell them that their family tree starts there too. i'm pretty sure this could result in some interesting conversation.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ya, i guess the name lends itself to femaleness.

[/ QUOTE ]

'Des' is short for my first name DESTIN (as in Destiny or Destin, Florida). 'Dia' is short for my last name DIARRA, which is West African and means 'A Gift' or 'A Gift from GOD'(all praises to to the birthplace of civilization and the human race, baby).

[/ QUOTE ]

While I admire such a cultured name, it still sucks.

[ QUOTE ]
and since we're on the subject of femaleness, i'm sure you, Sponger, and your ancestors can trace your family tree back to Africa and a BLACK WOMAN (Queen Mother Earth). say it loud, I'M BLACK AND I'M PROUD!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I am black, from the waist down /images/graemlins/wink.gif **sigh**

[ QUOTE ]
oh BTW, good luck on building your BR back. why don't you come play a few $5 + $.50 SNGs on Stars. i'll keep the light on for ya.

[/ QUOTE ]

Awww thanks for your care desdia, I've made $5k since returning to poker 2 months ago, heck with a 40% ROI at the $5's You could make that much in 2,000 SNGs! See ya in a couple years!

[ QUOTE ]
Sponger, the next time you're sitting down drinking Millers with the good 'ole boys and sharing an introspective moment, tell them you just found out WHERE your family tree starts. then tell them that their family tree starts there too. i'm pretty sure this could result in some interesting conversation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeehaw, I'm a country redneck, how'd you guess?? (laff)

And I don't drink millers, that [censored] tastes like, uh, [censored]. I just like their hats.

http://sponger15sb.bravehost.com/hat.JPG

[Rick Nebiolo]

Annie,

A lot has been written about you (obviously, much of which is not positive) on RGP and to a lessor extent here on 2+2 but with posts like these and others my guess is a lot of us are developing a lot of respect. Congrats on your win!

~ Rick

PS Read your sister's book "Poker Face". Much of it hit home since I grew up around (not in) that prep school culture (in Newport, Rhode Island). Plus have a cousin who is married to a prep school wrestling coach/math instructor and who lived in prep school on campus housing for years (sort of like John Irving's "World According to Garp"). Wonder if you read it (Garp)?

[plaid]

>> In the heads up match with Phil they missed a lot of hands as well.

How long did you and Phil play heads up?

(The time compression required for TV does make for many peculiarities -- for example, it seemed strange that you had to call your brother by phone...according to the TV timeline, it seemed like he wouldn’t have had time to leave the building by the time you won...was almost wondering if there was a long break before heads-up started).

[ericd]

Could it possibly be that Annie had to put up with a lot of "expletives deleted" (I guess I'm dating myself) here? I know if my sister had been treated in the manner that Annie had been I'd have a lot of trouble forgiving and forgetting. I'd have difficulty being civil let alone doing anyone here a favor.

[37offsuit]

Good post.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

[ QUOTE ]
We noticed the fish shirt. You ain't fooling anyone. Didn't see the raise amount you made with the 2nd 89, but were the pot odds there?

P.S. Love ya man, but you blew all your chips off with 2x 89 and T9. Pot odds only go so far, and I'm not sure you had them in every instance for the standard opposing hands. Actually kinda disappointed in yer performance, but hey, WTF do i know.

P.P.S. I gotta admit, seeing her on tonight's show, if I met up with Annie, it could be a bit delicate....

[/ QUOTE ]

This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything. The only thing is, you have to make a good read of what the opponent has before you can figure out what pot odds you need for the call to be correct. In the case of the first 89s hand, the pot odds were huge, such that even if Annie held an overpair the call would barely be wrong. In the second 89o hand, the pot odds were slightly less than 3:1 as I recall, so again the call is right by a large margin against unpaired overcards, just about right if she has a better 8 or a better 9, and off by a goodly margin if she has an overpair. And I sensed that she didn't want me to call, and that tipped the balance of what was otherwise a close call. As for the T9 final hand, well, I felt that it was too good to fold, and that if I limped, Annie would likely raise and I would have to fold. I also thought that a smaller raise would be the less desirable than all-in, as a 3x raise would've been over 30% of my stack. Finally, I figured she would fold a lot of hands (probably 80% of so), and that I'd be no worse than a 2:1 dog against the range of hands with which she would call. I may have been wrong about these particulars, but once we take them as a given, I like the play. So, either I played it perfect, or the data I gathered and processed was flawed.

Overall, I'm happy with pretty much every decision I made the whole tourney. Then and now.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Annie,

Thanks for the kind words. They are appreciated.

And not just to turn this into a mutual admiration society, but I thought you also played well. In fact, I did not see a single decision at the entire table that I thought was clearly wrong. There were some debatable plays, but none that were slam-dunk mistakes. THAT is why this table is different than what you see on most poker shows. You can argue about who played great and who just played well, but nobody played poorly.

I don't think anybody was more than a 12:1 dog to win this thing, nor was anybody better than an 8:1 favorite. 7:1 maybe, but certainly no better than that.

In a sense, the skill level was high enough that it became a bit like an amateur game, in the sense that luck made almost all of the difference. I don't disagree with any of Annie's plays, but she was unlucky to find herself in a lot of bad spots, and then lucky to catch the cards she needed, especially against Howard and myself.

However, I wasn't there to watch the play after I was eliminated. It is quite possible that Annie really outplayed Phil, and the show made it look like she mostly caught cards against him instead.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
In the second 89o hand, the pot odds were slightly less than 3:1 as I recall

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

That was impossible to know from ESPN's broadcast. From where I sat, it looked like 2:1. That changes everything, of course.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

In another thread on this hand, it was posted that given Annie's chip count after the hand ended, I must have been getting almost exactly 2:1 on the call. However, I recall it was significanlty better than 2:1, though not 3:1. Either I was wrong, or the chip count ESPN showed wasn't immediately after the hand ended. They've been known to do that, you know. ;-)

And, it's not like I've been sitting here for weeks stewing about this hand. It's possible I've forgotten some of the details.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[NorCalJosh]

in skimming through that post the first time, i would have sworn that you said the dia came from diarrhea.

[MrGo]

Makes me realize how important pot odds are. Obviously they are important and all tournament play, but are they more important in a winner take all event?? From what you said - "This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything." I am guessing yes. Can you explain?

Thanks.

[Cleveland Guy]

You and Annie were in the hand, and I was not. But IIRC - you raised to 60K, she re-raised all in to about 137K.

So it's 67K more for you to call. There is your 60K, her 137K, plus the blinds and antes. I think you were getting at least 3.1 if not better.

I'm sure the shot of the chip stacks with annie over 400K was taken a bit later on, not right after the hand.

[aces961]

[ QUOTE ]
Makes me realize how important pot odds are. Obviously they are important and all tournament play, but are they more important in a winner take all event?? From what you said - "This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything." I am guessing yes. Can you explain?

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming all players are of equal skill or very close to it. Your chances of winning, getting first, are equal to the percentage of total chips in play you have. So for a winner take all tourney since all that matters is getting first. Chip EV is the same as tourament EV so pot odds are all matters. In a non winner take all tourney this is not the case since part of your ev for the tourney comes from places other than first.

[bobby rooney]

A few weeks back when the WPT Bad Boys of Poker aired, there was great controversy over a call Gus made with T8s and I argued that the winner-take-all format encouraged gambling and aggression. Similarly, I'm wondering if this affected some of Greg's decisions. If you are aware that your opponents thinking is along the same lines, you know that they will be making more aggressive moves as well, so you don't always give as much credit to your opponents as having what they are representing.

In addition, the upside of building a monster stack is huge; whereas the downside of finishing in 2nd is the same as finishing dead last.

Maybe Annie or Greg can post something explaining some of the strategic changes they made based on the winner-take-all format and their thinking behind those changes.

[bobby rooney]

Well for one thing, if there are two million chips on the table, and no other prize than first, then the chips are cash value. That has to change things quite a bit from a normal tournament where the chips change value and survival is of paramount importance. Sure you still want to survive, but can you pass up on any +EV situations? I'm not really sure myself as I haven't thought through all of the winner-take-all implications.

[Dominic]

Annie, I thought showing that 9 to Phil was CLASSIC. My girlfriend and I were rolling on the floor, laughing, after that...and your "I don't know Phil, I thought the 9 was good" line...

too funny...and congratulations on the win...gotta get lucky at least once to win - and those 66s vs. Howard's 77s was yours...must suck doing it against your brother, though...I once busted my girlfriend out of a Hollywood Park tourney - one place out of the money - and I didn't hear the end of it!

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Dominic]

Are you serious, dude? Annie outdrew her brother. Big deal. He's a big boy and knows it happens. I'm sure he's over it by now.

[tewall]

I was confused watching the show because you lost this huge pot with 333 and then were ahead. I was wondering how that happened. It also makes the K9 stuff make more sense.

When I was watching when he showed the King I immediately though, "Show him the 9!" and was very pleased when you did.

[ericd]

I'm certain you misunderstood.

[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
In the heads up match with Phil they missed a lot of hands as well. I went from a 2 to 1 chip deficit after the hand we we both had 333 to the lead by check raise blussinf him about 4 times in a row.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife watched most of the show with me but not the headsup. I told her, "Annie won, Phil made some good laydowns, Phil would get good headsup flops, Annie would get great ones."

I didn't know you kicked his ass to get that lead back after that tough trips hand. Nice.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Greg, pot odds mean nothing in tournaments. YOU LOSE AND YOU'RE OUT. I read it on 2+2!

People like you who treat tournaments like cash games are nothing but dead money and are welcome at my table any time. I read that on 2+2 as well.

[illguitar]

With all of these poker intricacies being discussed, it really makes me realize how hard it is to be a poker player, (fan). As a poker player myself I find myself yelling at the TV trying to help my favorite players make their decisions. Then I sit back and realize that I know nothing about the hand. I don't know what happened the previous three hands, and I don't know what the pot odds are. I also know what cards everyone holds.

This is beginning to frustrate me, it was fun watching poker on TV at first, but now I feel like hand after hand is misrepresented. I know that they only show some of these hands because Norman Chad makes some dumb reference to Jiffy Lube. I know the World Wide Leader wants these events to be nationally popular, but much like the NFL draft couldn't we make this televised on ESPN 2 afterwards without key hands being left out and with REAL commentators that know something more about the game? Wouldn't this truly be excellent for poker?


-Daver

PS- As mentioned above I'm proud of both of my fellow 2+2ers on their performances in the TOC. You'd both own me at the table any and every time we played.

[srblan]

That's one thing that I really liked about Fox's live broadcast earlier this year. You really got to see the ante-stealing and that championship players really DO fold during heads up play.

Anyhow, great job, and I loved showing Phil the 9 (though I don't see why he didn't just assume that you had two pair, at least).

Matt

[theBruiser500]

"In the heads up match with Phil they missed a lot of hands as well. I went from a 2 to 1 chip deficit after the hand we we both had 333 to the lead by check raise blussinf him about 4 times in a row. That is what he was mumbling aobut after he lost. They just all of a sudden showed me with the lead when the K9 hand happened with no explanation of how I got it."

Yeah, I was wondering about this too, it looked like you lost a big pot and then all of a suddden was even in chips with him again. I only watch these shows just to see the greats play and to listen to the table talk, there isn't a lot of good poker content in there. I really like dthe way they showed every hand at the Turning Stone touranment, wish they'd do that more, that was aweosome. Congradulations to you Annie Duke.

[siccjay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Greg, pot odds mean nothing in tournaments. YOU LOSE AND YOU'RE OUT. I read it on 2+2!

People like you who treat tournaments like cash games are nothing but dead money and are welcome at my table any time. I read that on 2+2 as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

[Wayfare]

Sounds super female to me. Now I guess I know better.

Birthplace of f____'in civilization!

[mikeyvegas]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Annie, any idea why your bro doesn't post here? Think you could get him to start?

[/ QUOTE ]

Annie,

I want to second that thought. I think the board would really benifit from Howard posting here. Much the way we are benifiting from both you and Paul Phillips posting here now.

T.D.,

Love the location insert!

[Scooterdoo]

Annie, congrats. I thought you played well. I was also confused after Phil took so many of your chips with the Q3 vs J3 hand and a few minutes later you had a big chip lead. Clearly you had won a few big pots and it made no sense that they didn't show it or at least explain how your lead got so big.

I loved the K9 hand and the way you handled him. Your brothers reaction when he realized that Phil folded AQ and it cost him half his stack (because he wouldn't have cald if Phil did) was priceless.

I just can't believe how ego-centric Phil is. For example, he had the biggest suckout of the night when he found his 2 outer on the river against Chan and he was equally lucky when the 2 3's flopped and he out-kicked you, yet he can't on ranting how you were so lucky and he was such a good player who didn't deserve 2nd. What am I missing? He's one of those sore losers who forgets all of his good luck and only remembers the good luck of others. If any one is to be upset it's Johnny Chan and your brother (on the hand where we outdrew him). You did great.

[curtains]

From what I saw, it seemed like it was automatic to call both reraises with the 98s and the T9. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but I don't think so.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds super female to me. Now I guess I know better.

Birthplace of f____'in civilization!

[/ QUOTE ]

Africa! know your history. it did'nt start in Greece or Rome. even Jesus, the son of GOD, was a BLACKMAN. so everytime you go to church to worship Jesus, don't be fooled into thinking his skin is that of a caucasoid when you look at pictures of THE LAST SUPPER! the BLACKMAN is the ORIGINAL MAN!

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Africa! know your history. it did'nt start in Greece or Rome. even Jesus, the son of GOD, was a BLACKMAN. so everytime you go to church to worship Jesus, don't be fooled into thinking his skin is that of a caucasoid when you look at pictures of THE LAST SUPPER! the BLACKMAN is the ORIGINAL MAN!

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this is a joke. Jesus was Jewish, and definitely not from Africa. Not white though.

Justin A

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Africa! know your history. it did'nt start in Greece or Rome. even Jesus, the son of GOD, was a BLACKMAN. so everytime you go to church to worship Jesus, don't be fooled into thinking his skin is that of a caucasoid when you look at pictures of THE LAST SUPPER! the BLACKMAN is the ORIGINAL MAN!

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this is a joke. Jesus was Jewish, and definitely not from Africa. Not white though.

Justin A

[/ QUOTE ]

nonetheless an African. does'nt matter what part of the world he was located in at the time, does'nt matter what culture he was apart of or what language he spoke, he was still African. if you read the description of how he looks in the Bible, he is none other than a BLACKMAN. i may have been born in America and i may speak English, but i am undoubtly of African descent. so was Jesus, does'nt matter if he was a Jew. what i find so foul about the White Man's approach to Jesus and the Bible is how it is portrayed throughout history that he is someone other than what he is-- A BLACKMAN. many people don't know that Africa is where mathematics, the Sciences, Agriculture, Irrigation, the Arts, etc all started. before the Kingdom of Rome, there was the Kingdom of Nubia, Thebes, and Memphis. there is a segment of Black Africans in Sudan (or close to it) who are the closest living descendants to the oldest human beings on earth. every race on this earth can trace their family tree back to Africa. if you look at the caucasoid colored skin people of the world, think about this for a moment: there is nothing on this earth that just creates white skin out of nowhere. white skin had to come from somewhere. the word HUMAN means HUE-MAN, man of color. white is devoid of color, the color BLACK is enveloping, able to overpower everything. the more you mix the color BLACK, the more you come up with OTHER COLORS. the BLACKMAN is HUE-MAN, man of color, from which all other races descend from.

Destin Diarra

[Greg (FossilMan)]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Greg, pot odds mean nothing in tournaments. YOU LOSE AND YOU'RE OUT. I read it on 2+2!

People like you who treat tournaments like cash games are nothing but dead money and are welcome at my table any time. I read that on 2+2 as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I must be wrong. I take it all back. If you let me?

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[HDPM]

Um, yeah. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif I posted on the gossip forum before seeing this. It was obvious you had him on tilt. He was hilarious when he busted out. Excellent work showing him the 9. Now for you, no more crying and keep your feet on the floor. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[citanul]

First of all, get a thread in other topics, or better, on another forum for this garbage. Learn to temper your verbal diarrhea, and not hijack threads for no reason.

Second, there is no word "blackman." There are two words, black man, which mean what I think you mean, when you say blackman.

Third, I don't think that there are more than a small group of people who frequent this board who don't know that the original humans were from Africa. This is pretty common knowledge.

Fourth, use paragraphs.

Fifth, being of African decent does not mean that a person is African. It means they are of African descent. Nice and tautological.

Sixth, other colors are not what you get when you mix things with black, technically. When you mix Red, Yellow, and Blue in various combinations, you get the other colors.

Seventh, and finally, learn to use paragraphs.

citanul

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, get a thread in other topics, or better, on another forum for this garbage. Learn to temper your verbal diarrhea, and not hijack threads for no reason.

Second, there is no word "blackman." There are two words, black man, which mean what I think you mean, when you say blackman.

Third, I don't think that there are more than a small group of people who frequent this board who don't know that the original humans were from Africa. This is pretty common knowledge.

Fourth, use paragraphs.

Fifth, being of African decent does not mean that a person is African. It means they are of African descent. Nice and tautological.

Sixth, other colors are not what you get when you mix things with black, technically. When you mix Red, Yellow, and Blue in various combinations, you get the other colors.

Seventh, and finally, learn to use paragraphs.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

it still starts with the color black. red, yellow, blue, green, orange, etc. all originate from the color black and mix together to create new colors. take a look at the Latin American countries like Puerto Rico, The Dominican Republic,
Panama, Brazil. they have citizens as white as George Dubya, as dark as Nelson Mandela, and all the shades in between. Sammy Sosa may be Dominican by country but he's nothing but a BLACKMAN. every color that represents a race on this planet came from the color black, just as every race can trace their family tree back to Africa, land of the BLACKMAN. huff, puff, and blow the house down all you want.

[River2Pair]

586 posts in four months? Good God man! I've gathered that you play $5 SNGs, but how, when you must spend so much time thinking about all this crap, reading the replies and replying to the replies, ad nauseum. How did a thread about the ESPN TOC become about the origins of mankind???!!!

[SmileyEH]

Desdia....the ambasador for African Americans and educator of 2+2.

ugh.

At least he is a solid "sit-n-go specialist".

-SmileyEH

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was a winner-take-all event. Pot odds are everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Greg, pot odds mean nothing in tournaments. YOU LOSE AND YOU'RE OUT. I read it on 2+2!

People like you who treat tournaments like cash games are nothing but dead money and are welcome at my table any time. I read that on 2+2 as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I must be wrong. I take it all back. If you let me?

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

It takes character to admit a mistake. I will let you off the hook, just this once!

[johnd192]

Hmm that mixing the primary colors of light give you white. Black is the absence of light. Mixing the primary colors of paint give you black. White is the absence of pigments. Also just because we have found the earliest known hominid in Africa does not prove he was a 'black' man. Modern man is [censored] Sapiens and the hominid (ape-man) you refer to is Orrorin tugenensis or perhaps 'Lucy', also known as Australopithecus afarensis.

Now I am sure that this whole early ape-man started in Africa makes you feel empowered, but the way you present this shows your total lack of understanding of the early origins of man ([censored] sapiens) and just a biased view of man based on black power teachings. Currently there are two theories of the origins of [censored] sapiens and yours is the Out of Africa scenario, but the other is the Multi Region theory. The truth of the matter is that noone knows for sure how modern humans came into being and whether they originated in africa or originated around the same time in the regions known as europe, africa, and asia.

On a side note being the 'first' doesn't mean your the best and if today's history is any proof the first 'civilizations' are not doing so well.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm that mixing the primary colors of light give you white. Black is the absence of light. Mixing the primary colors of paint give you black. White is the absence of pigments. Also just because we have found the earliest known hominid in Africa does not prove he was a 'black' man. Modern man is [censored] Sapiens and the hominid (ape-man) you refer to is Orrorin tugenensis or perhaps 'Lucy', also known as Australopithecus afarensis.

Now I am sure that this whole early ape-man started in Africa makes you feel empowered, but the way you present this shows your total lack of understanding of the early origins of man ([censored] sapiens) and just a biased view of man based on black power teachings. Currently there are two theories of the origins of [censored] sapiens and yours is the Out of Africa scenario, but the other is the Multi Region theory. The truth of the matter is that noone knows for sure how modern humans came into being and whether they originated in africa or originated around the same time in the regions known as europe, africa, and asia.

On a side note being the 'first' doesn't mean your the best and if today's history is any proof the first 'civilizations' are not doing so well.

[/ QUOTE ]

"censored" sapiens kicks ass btw.

[citanul]

[censored] you totally beat me to it.

citanul

[Ghazban]

Nice post; I'm somewhat surprised you didn't address the riculousness of the "hue-man" argument with the linguistic derivation of the word "human" (which I don't know off the top of my head but I think its of Latin origin).

[johnd192]

lol the preview post doesnt show that Ho-mo would be censored.

[citanul]

human
c.1250, from M.Fr. humain "of or belonging to man," from L. humanus, probably related to [censored] (gen. hominis) "man," and to humus "earth," on notion of "earthly beings," as opposed to the gods (cf. Heb. adam "man," from adamah "ground"). Cognate with O.Lith. zmuo (acc. zmuni) "man, male person." Displaced its O.E. cognate guma (from P.Gmc. *guman-) which survives only in disguise in bridegroom. First record of humankind is from 1645. Humanoid (1918) is a hybrid of L. humanus and Gk. -oeides "like," from eidos "form, shape."

[citanul]

Not that I disagree with your points about Des's lunacy, but, I think, (I'm not sure):

a) when you mix the primary colors of paint, you get an ugly brown, not black.

b) when you mix the primary colors of light, I don't know what you get, but I think you need to mix something close to a full visible spectrum, to get white light.

all other points, agreed.

citanul

[r2p]

It's nice to see you don't take yourself to seriously. I also enjoyed your handling of "the mouth". Class act

[Phishy McFish]

NM /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[johnd192]

Magenta, cyan, and yellow do create black with paints. Without getting into much physics the reason is this:
Magenta paints absorb green light.
Cyan paints absorb red light.
Yellow paints absorb blue light
The absence of light is black.

Red, Green, Blue show as white light to us. Light is perceived as white by humans when all three cone cell types are simultaneously stimulated by equal amounts of red, green, and blue light. Because the addition of these three colors yields white light, the colors red, green, and blue are termed the primary additive colors.

But the main point of my original post was to point out the obvious fallacy of his post...though I know most us agree that it is fallacious.

[Mojo, The Programmer]

Fascinating how this post has gone from a question about the Fossilman calling AD's bets to a discussion of the Physics of color, Race, and on and on and on...

How far will it go? Will someone please bring up an Abortion Rights discussion?

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[citanul]

ooh ooh, i vote it goes to dead baby jokes, everyone likes a good dead baby joke.

citanul

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
Fascinating how this post has gone from a question about the Fossilman calling AD's bets to a discussion of the Physics of color, Race, and on and on and on...

[/ QUOTE ]

Strangest. Hijack. Ever.

[Desdia72]

rummaging through your Crayola boxes trying to figure it out. the oldest evidence of human-like creatures and people and the oldest hominid to modern humans both came from Africa. the point of COLORS was to emphasis that the human race did'nt originated from Europe (which has predominately Caucasoid skin colors), it originated from Africa, no matter how you slice it. as far as my play on the word HUMAN to HUE-MAN, it does'nt matter what language the word comes from or who made it up. HUE simply refers to color so HUE-MAN means man of color. the dominant man of color is the African man and all other colors and shades of man are lighter and mixed blends of his color- Dark or Black.

www.africana.com/research/encarta/tt_814.asp (http://www.africana.com/research/encarta/tt_814.asp)
www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?=ns99992533 (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?=ns99992533)

[Gamblor]

Moses was black too.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm that mixing the primary colors of light give you white. Black is the absence of light. Mixing the primary colors of paint give you black. White is the absence of pigments. Also just because we have found the earliest known hominid in Africa does not prove he was a 'black' man. Modern man is [censored] Sapiens and the hominid (ape-man) you refer to is Orrorin tugenensis or perhaps 'Lucy', also known as Australopithecus afarensis.

Now I am sure that this whole early ape-man started in Africa makes you feel empowered, but the way you present this shows your total lack of understanding of the early origins of man ([censored] sapiens) and just a biased view of man based on black power teachings. Currently there are two theories of the origins of [censored] sapiens and yours is the Out of Africa scenario, but the other is the Multi Region theory. The truth of the matter is that noone knows for sure how modern humans came into being and whether they originated in africa or originated around the same time in the regions known as europe, africa, and asia.

On a side note being the 'first' doesn't mean your the best and if today's history is any proof the first 'civilizations' are not doing so well.

[/ QUOTE ]

the BEST, except you. i said the ORIGINAL. i said every race on this planet can trace their family tree back to Africa. whether the first civilizations are doing good or bad was also never brought up and does'nt even matter. it was simply put, they were the FIRST and they were also in AFRICA. so, AFRICA is the birthplace of the earliest human-like creatures, the human race, and human civilization. this is'nt Black Power teachings, this is WORLD TEACHINGS spoken by a BLACKMAN.

[Edge34]

Please, please take this to the OT forum...

[censored] Sapiens is some funny stuff...

"The dominant man of color is the African man and all other colors and shades of man are lighter and mixed blends of his color..."

Physics says black is a mixture of all colors, which would absorb all light. This is getting way too far out there. Oh yeah, "black man" is two words...just restating what's already been pointed out.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Moses was black too.

[/ QUOTE ]

The White Man rewriting World History to suit his view. i also hear Helen of Troy was a Black Woman. it kind of makes me wonder how there could a such thing as White Supremacy or White-instituted Racism: "the dog biting the hand that feeds it" or "the wayward child denying and trying to distance him/herself from the mother in which it came".

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Please, please take this to the OT forum...

[censored] Sapiens is some funny stuff...

"The dominant man of color is the African man and all other colors and shades of man are lighter and mixed blends of his color..."

Physics says black is a mixture of all colors, which would absorb all light. This is getting way too far out there. Oh yeah, "black man" is two words...just restating what's already been pointed out.

[/ QUOTE ]

studies of mitochondrial and chromosomal DNA show the modern humans descended from dark skinned humans in Africa.
lighter skin tones evolved as these humans migrated to latitudes north and farther south of the equator where UV radiation was lower and where the need for melanin decreases.

[Wayfare]

Cradle of f_____'in civilization!

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fascinating how this post has gone from a question about the Fossilman calling AD's bets to a discussion of the Physics of color, Race, and on and on and on...

[/ QUOTE ]

Strangest. Hijack. Ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

sex of a person only based on their screenname, Sponger for lending his two cents in trying to clarify, and Daliman again for staying along the lines of his original wrong assumption.

[citanul]

Well, in this point, it clearly does matter where the word came from and who made it up.

Human is one word, which has been discussed.

Having just made up the word "HUE-MAN" spelled correctly only in caps, I suppose it is your perogative to define it any way you please. So sure, I suppose we could call for international recognition of the word "HUE-MAN" as "man of color," but then what the hell does "BLACKMAN" mean?

citanul

edit: I also don't think that anyone prior to your bringing up the subject said that civilization or humanity originated anywhere else. Now that you have brought up the subject however, you must consider the fact that another poster has brought up an alternative theory that is apparently being passed about.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Moses was black too.

[/ QUOTE ]

The White Man rewriting World History to suit his view.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was what was going on when people said Jesus was white? From what I've heard of the discussion, the same sorts of "evidence" that say Jesus was a BLACKMAN say that Moses was as well.

Evidence all being relative of course here.

citanul

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, in this point, it clearly does matter where the word came from and who made it up.

Human is one word, which has been discussed.

Having just made up the word "HUE-MAN" spelled correctly only in caps, I suppose it is your perogative to define it any way you please. So sure, I suppose we could call for international recognition of the word "HUE-MAN" as "man of color," but then what the hell does "BLACKMAN" mean?

citanul

edit: I also don't think that anyone prior to your bringing up the subject said that civilization or humanity originated anywhere else. Now that you have brought up the subject however, you must consider the fact that another poster has brought up an alternative theory that is apparently being passed about.

[/ QUOTE ]

eluded to, which is why i also provided links in a previous post. those two links discuss human-like and ancestors to modern man where the age of the finds all outdate any discoveries of homonid beings outside of Africa, including Cromagnon and Neaderthal Man. so, however you look at it, every passing discovery of human remains in Africa are becoming older and older. no other findings in other places on this planet can compare in age, and in most cases, we're talking about millions of years.

[Gamblor]

The White Man rewriting World History to suit his view.

Don't be so god damn indignant. Everyone's been taken for a ride at some point. Look now how racist the Arab world is against the "white" people. Any white man is immediately a murderous infidel American.

God I'd hate to be a white kid in South Central Los Angeles right now.

I'd hate to be a Jew in Iraq (oh, wait. nevermind)

The important thing, is that as long as you don't make a big deal of it, nobody else will.

Who gives a fuck if Moses was black, brown, red, yellow, or green?

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Moses was black too.

[/ QUOTE ]

The White Man rewriting World History to suit his view.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was what was going on when people said Jesus was white? From what I've heard of the discussion, the same sorts of "evidence" that say Jesus was a BLACKMAN say that Moses was as well.

Evidence all being relative of course here.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

and who are the people who perpetrated or portrayed Jesus to be White? White People. when you read the description of Jesus in the Bible, he's nothing like he appears in the holy pictures that we see throughout the world. you don't have to take my word for it. do the research on your own. there are quite a few icons from back then that are of African descent who get portrayed as if they are White in modern day. that's a huge reason why alot of White folk in modern day are clueless as to what REALLY HAPPENED. that's why farces like, Christopher Columbus discovering America, a country that was already populated by the Native Indian Tribes, can get written into the history books as if it were true. Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece. even Egyptian Pharoahs from back then are portrayed as other than African.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
The White Man rewriting World History to suit his view.

Don't be so god damn indignant. Everyone's been taken for a ride at some point. Look now how racist the Arab world is against the "white" people. Any white man is immediately a murderous infidel American.

God I'd hate to be a white kid in South Central Los Angeles right now.

I'd hate to be a Jew in Iraq (oh, wait. nevermind)

The important thing, is that as long as you don't make a big deal of it, nobody else will.

Who gives a fuck if Moses was black, brown, red, yellow, or green?

[/ QUOTE ]

that's part of the problem right there. "The important thing, is that as long as you don't make a big deal over it, nobody else will". so how does HIS-TORY get corrected with THE REAL HISTORY if Africans and Blacks in America kepted quite and did'nt make a big deal of it? it's a reason why Arabs across the world despise the White race. it's a reason why alot of other races across the world despise the White race, especially native Africans. one can look toward The Jewish Holocaust and the African Middle Passage (slave trade). putting a White face on Black and African history (including African firsts and achievements) is one of the biggest bootlegs of alltime. why would you not give a damn whether Moses or Jesus was Black, if all your life you were lied to and learned they were White?

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
Who gives a fuck if Moses was black, brown, red, yellow, or green?

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa whoa whoa, lets get to the real meat of this thread, and drop all of Des's garbage, because it's really getting tiresome in just about every thread.

How the [censored] did you get [censored] to appear on the board, or is [censored] outside of the censors, though [censored] we learned to be bleeped out?

citanul

[Gamblor]

They tell you when you reach Pooh-Bah.

It's posted in the Pooh-Bah forum.

[Drac]

Why are you arguing about the skin color of fictional characters?

[Bulldog]

[ QUOTE ]
So sure, I suppose we could call for international recognition of the word "HUE-MAN" as "man of color," but then what the hell does "BLACKMAN" mean?

citanul



[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.geocities.com/tzovas/nbastars/blackman.jpg

Remember, in 1987, when I hit those two free throws with no time left in the all-star game, and the West went on to win in overtime? Remember that? That was cool.

I AM BLACKMAN (, Rolando).

[ddubois]

[ QUOTE ]
Overall, I'm happy with pretty much every decision I made the whole tourney. Then and now.

[/ QUOTE ]
I had skimmed this thread before, but I just saw the show for the first time last night, so I had no context to know what anyone was talking about. In watching the show, those 98o and T9o hands very much gave me a "what the hell?!" reaction. I suppose I understand the logic now, but does anyone have the actual stack size and bet data to go through a more detailed analysis with PokerStove for the education of this forum?

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]

Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece.

[/ QUOTE ]


And now we know the answer to the age-old question of "What's a Nubian?" Thanks!


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[lolita16]

From a fellow poker "chick", it was great to see a lady win it. You played brilliantly and I too, loved the showing of the 9. The funny thing is that you misrepresented nothing, and did nothing to force Phil to think that he read your hand incorrectly. He said that he put you on two pair (or probably less likely, a set). Had he kept his ego out of the equation, he might have confirmed that his read was correct, but the almighty ego got in his way.

Anyway, congrats on a great victory.

Regards-

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece.

[/ QUOTE ]


And now we know the answer to the age-old question of "What's a Nubian?" Thanks!


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

no problemo. you gotta learn from somewhere. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece.

[/ QUOTE ]


And now we know the answer to the age-old question of "What's a Nubian?" Thanks!


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

no problemo. you gotta learn from somewhere. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


And, to think, it all started with "Chasing Amy" -- now, finally, the circle is complete.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece.

[/ QUOTE ]


And now we know the answer to the age-old question of "What's a Nubian?" Thanks!


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

no problemo. you gotta learn from somewhere. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


And, to think, it all started with "Chasing Amy" -- now, finally, the circle is complete.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

that's pathetic.

[Vince Lepore]

Greg,

I'm not sure that you were getting 2 to 1 but I don't accept that it was a correct call even if you were getting those odds or slightly better. There were othere things to consider, like how losing the hand would affect your overall chances of winning the tournament. Your chip position and blinds before the call were such that you would have found, I believe, a much better situation to "gsamble" your chips. I think your call was a big mistake and it also led to your moving in with a T.9 to bbe knocked out.

Vince /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Most White folk have never heard of Ancient Nubia, a great African Kingdom, before Rome and Greece.

[/ QUOTE ]


And now we know the answer to the age-old question of "What's a Nubian?" Thanks!


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

no problemo. you gotta learn from somewhere. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


And, to think, it all started with "Chasing Amy" -- now, finally, the circle is complete.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[/ QUOTE ]

that's pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm assuming you're saying it's pathetic that you didn't see that punchline coming a mile away.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Spladle Master]

Suppose Annie showed Greg AKo in the 98s hand. Would you still fold to her re-raise?

If so, your answer to that question is indicative of why you will never be as successful of a tournament player as you could be.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
Greg,

I'm not sure that you were getting 2 to 1 but I don't accept that it was a correct call even if you were getting those odds or slightly better. There were othere things to consider, like how losing the hand would affect your overall chances of winning the tournament. Your chip position and blinds before the call were such that you would have found, I believe, a much better situation to "gsamble" your chips. I think your call was a big mistake and it also led to your moving in with a T.9 to bbe knocked out.

Vince /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Vince,

I’m not exactly sure what you’re trying to say here......I also have problems with the same issues. In dealing with these kinds of things I find that (for me) when I attempt to logically work through these issues, I inevitably end up running into what I call the ‘brain vapor lock’ wall. Let me try to explain and see if it makes any sense.

Before I do, is it not very important to understand the implications of the fact that this is a No-Limit,“Winner take All” format? As such, does that fact alter ‘conventional’ multi-place payout tournament strategy? Although I can’t put my finger on all of the specific reasons that it may, it seems to me that somehow it must.

In any case, that said, you bring up the issue of “gamble”. This is a concept that I struggle with. Most of us seem to accept the fact that when you’re a 51-49 fav, that you are mathematically ‘ahead’. When you are a 60-40 fav, you are ‘more” mathematically ahead. When you are a 70-30 fav, you are prohibitive favorite to win the hand. With that in mind, I still struggle with the issue of determining ‘when to gamble’ during a ‘normal’ tournament, never mind a winner-take-all format.

Contrast the above to ring game strategy, where, if you are consistent and play correctly, (i.e., get you’re $$ in when you are the favorite at all times) theoretically, you will have +EV in the long-run, therefore you MUST take every opportunity to get you’re money in when the math favors you.

Add to the above the issue of ‘compounding bad decisions’. For our purpose here, let’s say that what we’re really talking about is ‘unfavorable results’, not bad decisions. What I mean by this is......Let’s say that in a tournament you get your money in as a favorite, and you lose the hand. In doing so, this results in the ‘crippling’ of your stack, effectively limiting your range of play options from there forward. We’ve all had this happen to us, and we seem to accept it as ‘part of the game’, but I’m not so sure that it necessarily is.

On one hand, there is the ‘make good decisions’ school of thinking. Simply stated that means, whenever one takes an action, make the ‘correct’ decision, and let the chips fall where they may. Clean, simple, straightforward, math-based and for ring games (everything else being equal) appears to be a totally proper way to play.

It’s about at this point in my thinking that I must admit that I go into a brain ‘vapor lock’ situation, and I have some questions.

Are the different dynamics of standard tournament play significant enough to cause one to modify the above ring game strategy? If so, how?

Compound this with the difference between a ‘Standard tournament pay-out format’ and a ‘Winner take all tournament pay-out format’. Does the difference between these ‘similar-but-different’ formats cause one to re-modify ones strategy?

Is it possible that in jumping from ring games to ‘conventional tournaments’ to ‘winner take all tournaments’ that one actually moves back more towards optimum ring game strategy when one changes from ‘normal tournament play’ to ‘winner take all tournament play’?

I guess what I’m asking here is.........Is it likely that there are actually quantifiable differences in ‘best’ strategy for the 3 different formats?

My gut tells me “Yes”, but my brain can’t get me there.

Any light that any poster can shed on my confusion would be greatly appreciated!

Myrt.............

[Vince Lepore]

Tournament poker is not poker. Successful tournament play involves two skills, poker skills and tournament skills. The most important tournament skill is "survival" skill. "When you're broke, you're gone" is the anthem of for this skill.

In live poker if you are getting the best of it and the play that you are considering has no or minimal effect on your bankroll you make the positive EV play everytime. In a tournament this is also true. The difference in a tournament is that almost, if not all, of your decisions affect your bankroll. Certainly there are situations in which the effect is minimal. In live games you would be wrong to make a decision that had a negative EV regardless of how inconsequential it might be to your bankroll. In a tournament you might make a negative EV (tournament chip EV) play if it might result in eliminating an opponent. I'm getting a bit off subject here so I'll get back to Gregs situation.

Greg was getting 2 to 1 on his call. O.K. so his call has a positive EV if he is better than 2 to 1 to win the hand. So on the surface it would appear to be a good play. But in a tournament you must factor in the effect that your play has on your ability to survive. In this case if Greg loses which he will 60% of the time then he is severely crippled. You also must factor in what winning the hand will do to his chances of winning the tournament. Plus you also must consider the likelhood of getting a better situation to gamble his chips.

I am not a TJ fan when it comes to analyzing tournament situations but he once said and I aggree that when you are first to move your chips in you have two ways of winning. One if your opponent mucks his hand and two if you end up with the best hand. The power in NLH lies in betting and raising and not in calling.

Yes, there is difference in strategy in a multi-payout vs a winner take all tournament depending on your goal. However, even in a winner take all tournament when you're broke, you're gone must be considered. This is the driving concept behind getting you're money in first. Well that's how I see it anyway.

Hey, btw, did you call me an old goat?

Wait til I see you again.

Vince

[Myrtle]

Gee, I just re-checked my post, and I see no mention of an "old goat".....however, it could be your incredible reading skills that could see through me so clearly and read my mind.....except you mixed up the word 'goat' with 'fart'..... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

To the post.....OK...so we're in agreement regarding the fact that there are 3 different strategies involved.

What I’m trying to get to is being able to articulate, define, catalog and quantify the specifics of those differences in some sort of reasonably comprehensible framework.

To use an example from your post........ “In a tournament you might make a negative EV (tournament chip EV) play if it might result in eliminating an opponent.”........

I’d like to attempt to define and quantify the circumstances under which this apparently contradicting play (Ring vs. Tournament Strategy) could be proven to be correct. Here’s where I’m trying to go........If a play has a quantifiable -EV value as defined by commonly accepted thinking, is there a corresponding set of circumstances in tournament play that somehow ‘offsets’ the –EV aspects (effectively changing a –EV ring game play into a +EV tournament play) because of the differing set of parameters present in tournament play? If so, (and it appears that many players agree with this sentiment), what are the specifics of those circumstances, and if one can get specific in defining them, can one then realistically quantify them?

....and that’s where my brain fart commences.....I can’t get any further, and I’m hoping that some brighter bulbs than I can shed some light on this subject.

Again I ask......any thoughts from our fellow posters on this?

As far as seeing you again, Vincenzo.....Will be in Vegas 3rd – 8th of January.....Looking forward to seeing you then.

Myrt.........

[Vince Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
If a play has a quantifiable -EV value as defined by commonly accepted thinking, is there a corresponding set of circumstances in tournament play that somehow ‘offsets’ the –EV aspects (effectively changing a –EV ring game play into a +EV tournament play) because of the differing set of parameters present in tournament play

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow that be a mouth full! But the answer is "of course". What do you mean, you say? Well, for example, in a tournament you may be faced (happens a lot) with a decision that has a negative EV tournament chip wise but has a positive EV real money wise. For instnace if you are on the bubble and by taking the worst of it you have a reasonable or maybe less than reasonable chance of knocking out an opponent and getting into the money the corret play may be to go for it. Probably is correct to call with a pathetic hand like the one I normally call with all the time. This may be the only time in a tournament that yours truly's regular play has a positive EV.

Vince