How to become a top WPT player? And what is the best way to get there?

[Smoothcall]

How does one become a top WPT player? Does one have to be willing to risk there tournament life making a gutsy all in bluff. And playing aggressively not fearing ruin throughout a tourney? What makes these aggressive players that seem to rise to the top have in common? I would say aggression and fearlessness. Do you have to have this to be great? Or is there more roads than one to achieve being a top tourney player?

For instance a Dan Harrington i think differs from these other players but still may be a top player. He seems to play more of a tight to the vest game and survival thorugh alot of the tourney except for a few exception when he makes a move. But even his moves he doesnt risk all his chips and his tournament life usually. My style is more in line of how Dan harrington(not saying as good as him, just meaning playing a tight to the vest survival game) would play. But i'm wondering if it is better to throw this style out the window and look to emualte the aggressive players style. As there seem to be many more of the aggressive(ala Gus Hansen) players doing well than the Dan Harrington's and Dewey Tomnko's.

So what do you guys think? Can either style achieve the same goals? Or is one far better than the other? I think if the styles earned the same amount of money over a lifetime(hypothetically, they may not, but for argument sake) the aggressive player would win more tournies and get more money through books commercials etc.

One last thing. For the people(me included sometimes) that see plays that look like awful plays, and maybe they are awful plays. But maybe these are the plays that got them to the final table and they live or die by what got them there. Although i think the truley great players should be able to adjust from plays that got them there and what needs to be done at the final table. Just saying maybe these plays that look very stupid are plays that have made them beat these big fields and get there. And sometimes costs them a high finish at a final table but when it works brings them victory. Like Amir Vahedi at the wsop me when moneymaker won. He cost himslef alot of money as he was one of the chip leaders with moneymaker and sammy. But Amir wins many tournaments playing that style at final tables. I think this may be an extreme case and Amir just played badly. But the idea of bluffing alot of chips and getting in the face of the other leaders is what has won him so many tournies. So maybe we shouldn't 2nd guess them everytime they make what looks to be an awful play.

Ok i'm done. What you guys think?

[mosquito]

Not exactly the answer you were looking for, but
here goes....

Easiest way to become top WPT player is to start
out as the best, and then let a few others overtake
you in skill.

(kinda like it's easiest to become a millionaire
starting with 2 million)

[Voltron87]

Dan Harrington is definitely an aggressive and fearless player, what are you talking about?

[betgo]

You have to play aggressively towards the end of the tournament with huge blinds and maybe short handed. Earlier on, a tight approach can work particularly against bad loose players. Harrington discusses this in HOH2. Generally you have to be able to play aggressively and fearlessly whatever your style: players who cannot do this are known as weak/tight. For example, look at Harrington's bluff reraise of Arieh and Raymer with 62o.

A lot of plays late in a tournament are justified by pot odds, folding equity etc. For example, it is often correct for a short stack to push with a marginal hand, to move allin over top of a short stack allin with a less than premium hand, or to call a push form the BB with a junk hand. Generally you bluff when you have absolutely nothing and you know that is the only way to win, so it looks silly when it doesn't work.

[Brad22]

It all comes down to the tells. The top players know all the moves, strategy, numbers, hand selection, etc. Its the players who know how to figure out what you're holding, and then find a way to put you out of your comfort zone.

Everyone can learn all the other stuff, but the ability to literally figure out what the other guy may be playing, then figure out how much pressure the other person can take. Anyone can be crazy-aggressive at any time, and if thats all it took, everyone would learn the tactics.

I'm sure there are some crazy players who make it to the top, but the top players, who get on top and STAY THERE - they are the ones who can figure the other persons emotions out, and then play in such a way to throw them off.

[Smoothcall]

I could be wrong but i don't think Dan Harrington plays fearlessly and aggressive at the beginning of tournies. I believe he is the type to not come over the top and risk going broke. And more of the type of player who may just call a raise with 99's 1010's maybe even jj's as opposed to moving all in like alot of the players that i consider more aggressive and fearless. Like a Gus Hansen, Amir Vahedi, XCarlos Mortensen, Daniel Negreanu, Antonio E. ater on in the tourney, and in certain situations Dan may play agressive and fearless on agiven hand. But his game is a game more of survival througgout the tourney until in the money i would believe. If you don't see a difference in these playing styles from Dan Harrington to Gus Hansen then i guess one of us is way off base.

[Smoothcall]

Yes i agree with this about late play in the tourney. I am more referring to the playing style earlier in the tounrey into the middle when not in the money yet. What is the better style a Dan Harrington or Dewey Tomko who probably avoid big confrontaitons unless having monsters or the more agressive players who put people to the test for all the chips early to build there chips or go broke early.

[hotdog da 2rd]

i wonder how many top wpt players are gona take this one on.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
i wonder how many top wpt players are gona take this one on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably none, especially from the poster.

I am a tournament professional, but not in the WPT. If you want to be a top WPT professional, it is best first beat smaller tournaments. In baseball, you start in class A and work your way up to the majors, learning the fundamentals and gaining experience.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
Dan Harrington is definitely an aggressive and fearless player, what are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to speak for Smooth, but I would imagine what he's talking about is the obvious fact that Harrington is a much more conservative player than the average successful WPT player.

There. That wasn't too tough to decipher.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dan Harrington is definitely an aggressive and fearless player, what are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to speak for Smooth, but I would imagine what he's talking about is the obvious fact that Harrington is a much more conservative player than the average successful WPT player.

There. That wasn't too tough to decipher.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrington is a tight/aggressive player rather than a weak/tight player. It's seems to me that someone who will put most of his chips in with 62o is an aggressive and fearless player.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
Harrington is a tight/aggressive player rather than a weak/tight player. It's seems to me that someone who will put most of his chips in with 62o is an aggressive and fearless player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely true.

My point was that nobody even implied that Harrington is not this profile player. The very obvious point the OP was making is that he is clearly a more conservative player than the "average successful WPT player" during the early and middle stages of a tournment.

I guess I wanted to respond because I think this forum is backed up with a glut of disingenuous responses generated more by personality than by any actual solid analysis.

[ThaHero]

Just to be funny, all it takes is a lot of luck. Moneymaker won with a lot of luck. I'm no tourny expert, but everyone says his skills were sub-par, but he was just catching all the cards. Now he is a millionaire and can play in all the tournies he wants.

To be honest, it takes a lot of hard work, study, an intelligent mind, and still some luck. Everyone who tries to be a "Top WPT Player" won't make it. There are only so many final tables on t.v., and a good percentage of the players who make one of those final tables will never been seen on t.v. playing poker again.

Not just because they aren't that good and got lucky(that too) but also because it takes a mental toughness, a psychological makeup that not everyone has. Playing poker can be stressful and nerve racking at times if you let it, and not everyone can take it. I don't know if you saw that one episode this season with the Doctor who they were calling "Stoneface" or something to that extent. Well that guy said he might not play in another tournament for at least a year because it just took so much out of him. I'm not quoting verbatim but that is the gist. That is just one example.

So basically you have to have the psychological makeup(not saying every pro thinks the same), the skills(which can be learned), the determination(which probably can't be learned), and the luck(which you have no control over). Just my take on it.

[Smoothcall]

Especially from the poster lol? Yeah i bet they respect your posts much more thAn mine. I'm just a dope. You da man!

[Smoothcall]

You may have been being funny. But alot of what you said is true. You have to be lucky and make a score so you can continue to play more events and gain valuable experience. And just the fact that if you get to play them all you can maybe slide in a final table here and there until you make another score. And that valued experience will help a ton.

[maryfield48]

You are a noble soul, Rushmore. I can picture you at Camelot.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
You are a noble soul, Rushmore. I can picture you at Camelot.

[/ QUOTE ]

If, by "Camelot," you mean the strip joint on M Street in D.C., then you are correct. I'm not sure what's noble about it, but there you have it.

Seriously, though, I think that Smooth has taken enough flak here, and shouldn't need to continue to do penance for some initial odd conflicts here. I think he has become a decent poster who can instigate a good discussion without being merely provocative.

[oreogod]

[ QUOTE ]
How does one become a top WPT player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, dont suck at poker.

If u suck at poker your quickest way is to get to a point where u no longer suck at poker ** (see foot note)

The levels of getting to a WPT pro:

1. You suck at poker...get to I dont quite suck at poker, but I still kind of suck.

2. Progess to I can hold my own at poker
3.to Im okay at poker
4.Im decent at poker
5.Hey alright this game is too easy...wait, nope still a suck out
6.Not a suck out
7.Better at poker
8.Hey I am even better at poker now
9."I won a freeroll, baby!! Tea leaves say Im good, way good."
10.Danny Nygeun has nothing on me.
11.Okay, so now Im a totally decent player.
12.Satellite into WPT..."I killed those newbies, Ivey baby, here I come."
13.Suck out on Phil Ivey with 62o.
14.Dodged bullets from Tuan Le's Hip Hope style
15.[censored], eliminated in 85th place of WPT.
16.Try try again.

Get to not sucking at poker and u to can be a WPT champion.

(Players excluded from this ladder are Tuan Le (aka Let Me do a hip hop dance) and Danny Ngyuen (aka Ace Ventura owes me royalties baby!!!!))