Interesting article on Tilt by an ESPN writer

[detroitplayer]

Interesting in the fact where he's right on with the first half of the article, and then starts to praise the dialogue??? I couldn't tell if that was sarcasm or not.

Funny how at the bottom how he posts his online poker winnings...

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=lovinger/050118

[ClaytonN]

We've been mocking him for a looooong time

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting in the fact where he's right on with the first half of the article, and then starts to praise the dialogue??? I couldn't tell if that was sarcasm or not.

Funny how at the bottom how he posts his online poker winnings...

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=lovinger/050118

[/ QUOTE ]

He posts his online winnings at the bottom because he's an ESPN writer who took the advance on his book deal to become a professional poker player for a year.

He's an ok player, but his columns are mediocre at best. At first he promised insightful interviews with the best in the game. The only insight he's given has been into his bad beats and ups and downs.

To summarize his articles, he plays poker and writes what happens and how he gets screwed online. Hell, I could do that.

[GambleAB]

"Jackpot Jay" is neither interesting nor funny.
He doesn't know enough about poker to write anything insightful or interesting, and he doesn't have the sarcasm or wit to write anything amusing (ESPECIALLY when you look at what else is on Page 2).

[sdplayerb]

the article became unreadable when he called the Matador the protagonist.
I don't think he knows what protagonist means. The team are the protagonists.
By and large Jay is a moron and not a good poker player.
Good combo. bad writer and bad poker player. i always feel dumber after i've read his articles. i guess i shouldn't have tried this one either.

The show is pretty bad, but it is about poker. i did think episode 2 was better than episode 1 though.

[ClaytonN]

Technically, I don't think there's a protagonist among them. They're all cheats, colluders, liars, bitches, etc.

[mosquito]

[ QUOTE ]
Technically, I don't think there's a protagonist among them. They're all cheats, colluders, liars, bitches, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gosh, does that mean they really ARE poker players? /images/graemlins/shocked.gif /images/graemlins/shocked.gif /images/graemlins/shocked.gif /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[Michael Davis]

Okay, I'm not trying to be a dick, but you don't know what protagonist means.

-Michael

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
We've been mocking him for a looooong time

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, never noticed.

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
Online total: minus $4,743.


Career-to-date: plus $14,246.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand... is he saying he's won 19k at B&M?

[phixxx]

no string bets here bitch

[TheCroShow]

[ QUOTE ]
no string bets here bitch

[/ QUOTE ]

now why don't you take that otha half of the bet outta da pot, and let's finish this hand...

[Sluss]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand... is he saying he's won 19k at B&M?

[/ QUOTE ]

He had a good run at Foxwoods in the ACT I & IIs and won a lot of money by just playing super tight. Seems like he is playing way over his head online. And he seems like a self absorbed Donk.

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
He had a good run at Foxwoods in the ACT I & IIs and won a lot of money by just playing super tight. Seems like he is playing way over his head online. And he seems like a self absorbed Donk.



[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more. I see people on this forum agonizing over whether or not they can move up from 1/2 to 2/4 and sustain a bad run, or if their win rate is high enough at the 10+1 SNGs that they should take a crack at the 20's. Jackpot Jay does things like jumping right in to play 30/60 online. Are you kidding me? It's no wonder the online sharks have been tearing him apart limb from limb.

[tek]

He used the acronym SAG in the article. What is that?

[BoBtheBLOGGER]

[ QUOTE ]
He used the acronym SAG in the article. What is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Screen Actors Guild

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand... is he saying he's won 19k at B&M?

[/ QUOTE ]

He had a good run at Foxwoods in the ACT I & IIs and won a lot of money by just playing super tight. Seems like he is playing way over his head online. And he seems like a self absorbed Donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think half of his B&M winnings were from an Act III. He had already won a spot in the main tournament, so any other Act III satellites he won, he got to keep the $10,000 prize. Other than that, he really hasn't done anyting impressive besides get his ass beat online.

It was kinda funny because he went into his online stint thinking he was some hotshot poker player playing against a bunch of slacks at 30/60 tables. Little did he know, there are a lot of subtle differences playing online.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand... is he saying he's won 19k at B&M?

[/ QUOTE ]

He had a good run at Foxwoods in the ACT I & IIs and won a lot of money by just playing super tight. Seems like he is playing way over his head online. And he seems like a self absorbed Donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think half of his B&M winnings were from an Act III. He had already won a spot in the main tournament, so any other Act III satellites he won, he got to keep the $10,000 prize. Other than that, he really hasn't done anyting impressive besides get his ass beat online.

It was kinda funny because he went into his online stint thinking he was some hotshot poker player playing against a bunch of slacks at 30/60 tables. Little did he know, there are a lot of subtle differences playing online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've played in cash games with Jay at Foxwoods. He wasn't much of a ring game player live, either. He didn't seem like a bad guy, though.

scrub

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand... is he saying he's won 19k at B&M?

[/ QUOTE ]

He had a good run at Foxwoods in the ACT I & IIs and won a lot of money by just playing super tight. Seems like he is playing way over his head online. And he seems like a self absorbed Donk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think half of his B&M winnings were from an Act III. He had already won a spot in the main tournament, so any other Act III satellites he won, he got to keep the $10,000 prize. Other than that, he really hasn't done anyting impressive besides get his ass beat online.

It was kinda funny because he went into his online stint thinking he was some hotshot poker player playing against a bunch of slacks at 30/60 tables. Little did he know, there are a lot of subtle differences playing online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've played in cash games with Jay at Foxwoods. He wasn't much of a ring game player live, either. He didn't seem like a bad guy, though.

scrub

[/ QUOTE ]

When does he usually play at Foxwoods? I usually go on the weekends, but I'm guessing he plays more during the week.

[Klak]

i cant believe this guy plays poker for money and doesnt know what is being signaled by the other players when the cop busts out. im pretty sure that the show is trying to say that the matador knows that the guy has a set, and what is being signaled by the other players is how many outs to a boat he had. i dont think that columnest guy realized that the set of 2s still had outs. even tho they say this later in the show.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
Last week: lost $193 playing online.


Online total: minus $4,743.


Career-to-date: plus $14,246

[/ QUOTE ]


I want to see some Pokertracker screenshots.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
i cant believe this guy plays poker for money and doesnt know what is being signaled by the other players when the cop busts out. im pretty sure that the show is trying to say that the matador knows that the guy has a set, and what is being signaled by the other players is how many outs to a boat he had. i dont think that columnest guy realized that the set of 2s still had outs. even tho they say this later in the show.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah because chip signaling and subtly colluding in high stakes poker is a big part of the average poker game.
-James

[yoadrians]

I read 'Jackpot Jay' every week. I agree with the majority of posters here: He seems to be over his head ... especially online ... and just isn't that great of a player.

But here's why I read him every week: The guy has flat-out done amazing things in his life. Seriously, he was the editor of 'Life' magazine and has had an amazing stint as an editor and writer in the journalism industry. And I think it's pretty cool that he would take his book advance and dedicate one year of his successful life to play poker as a 'pro', as he calls it.

He might not be the best player ... far from it. But while I haven't learned ONE THING about how to become a better poker player by reading him, I'll keep reading him for the same reason I'll watch every episode of 'Tilt' ...

Because it's about poker. And I love poker.

[sdplayerb]

i hope i do, considering i am a fellow bruin.
protagonist is the leading person in the story..usually the good guy (tony soprano is probably the exception to this).
the team plus their leader are the protagonists.

[iMsoLucky0]

[ QUOTE ]
Madsen is probably best-known for his role in Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs," in which he plays the guy who cuts off the young cop's ear and then soaks him in gasoline, preparatory to burning the terrified cop alive. In many ways, that role was the perfect preparation for playing The Matador.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah.... right.

Playing The Matador has to be a huge step down for Madsen.

[top6]

I think the problem is that he's not much of a poker player, yet all he writes about are poker hands and how he played them - plus bad beats. It would be interesting if he would write more about the people he interacts with - and reading about him sitting by himself playing online poker is too depressing to think about. There must be about 50 people in any casino who are fascinating enough to have a column written about them - I just wish he would focus on that.

[Harkness]

Technically, the protagonist is the prinicipal character whose story we follow.

He or she doesn't have to be a good person.