My main problem with Moneymaker.

[Sincere]

In the Introduction to Poker Essays Volume II, Mason Malmuth states the following:

[ QUOTE ]
Many years ago, my friend and sometimes coauthor David Sklansky wrote an article about the "hot flashes." These are loose aggressive players who come to a poker center and manage to "run good" for a period of time. Sometimes they will be hot for six months, sometimes they will last a year, sometimes longer. What they never realize is that many players who play just like they do show up all the time. Players like myself usually dont notice them because their bankrolls frequently give out rather quickly. Occasionally, of course, we do notice the latest hot flash.

In fact, we often cant help but notice the "new superstar" .................................................. ........................But they all go broke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whenever I think of MM and then think of this "hot flash" concept, one name comes to mind. And Chris Moneymaker reminds me of that person. That person would be Huck Seed.

Seed came onto the poker seen and took the world by storm, much like MM has done. But where is he now? Yeah he still plays, but he is mostly broke and borrowing money. I've seen him borrowing money to pay off debts first hand.

Now back to MM. What is his resume? A little over a year ago, he had little or no bankroll and was playing $40 tournys on stars. Then goes on a huge rush and wins 2.5 mill and the world championship. He basically set the world on fire. But what has he done since? Ok, yeah he got 2nd in a WPT event. 10th in a PLO event this year, and was chip leader with 40 to go in the $5000 WSOP event and completely collapsed.

Now to me, a 2nd, a 10th, and a collapse isnt much of a resume to back up a WSOP win. He's done a little, but not a lot. But, the funny thing is, like Sklansky said, these "hot flashes" can last for a long time, and with a 2.5 million score, Im sure he will be around for a while more. He may even win a few more tournments, but how successfull will he be overall? That book is still open. Now I dont think MM is a bad player. I think he is a good player, but I dont think he is a great player. I think he is one of those "hot flashes" who took the world by fire and now millions of people are worshipping him without fully understanding flunctuations and standard deviation.

So, maybe Im wrong, maybe Im not. But Im not convinced that MM is a poker god, and I cant keep from subconsiously comparing him to Huck Seed.

[BreakEvenPlayer]

My main problem with Sincere is that he spent 10 minutes of his time writing up yet another post which basically paints Moneymaker as a lucky bastard who doesn't deserve any of this when the fact of the matter is that he is a SOLID NL tourney player who has a damn bracelet. Your time is better spent trying to improve your own game rather than worrying about whether CM is "good" or "great."

[Sincere]

I still can't figure out for the life of me why every time I make a post on here I get personal attacks?

[jwvdcw]

You have a decent point, but I think you exaggerate when you say that "But Im not convinced that MM is a poker god" because you're implying that others are saying this when in fact nobody is. The concensus opinion now seems to be that he is a decent player who could probably make a little money with a part time poker job, perhaps playing online. However, I don't think anyone thinks he is anything close to full time pro level.

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
I still can't figure out for the life of me why every time I make a post on here I get personal attacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably b/c you open yourself up to and it and BreakevenPlayer makes a damn good point.

[sucka]

My sentiments exactly.

What the f%&# have you done anyway?

[B Dids]

Because you're a one note pony who doesn't understand what he's talking about, and repeats the same argument (MM falling apart in the PLO event) even after it's been shot down.

You're also creating this strawman wherein people worship Moneymaker and that just doesn't exist.

You're swinging and windmills and you're not even making it entertaining.

[Daliman]

Once again I disagree with you

#1 MM is nowhere NEAR a poker god, and I've never seen a single post describing him as such.

#2 MM couldn't hold Huck Seed's jock when it comes to poker talent. Seed's failing was he was too action hungry.

Enjoy the windmills...

[Sincere]

Alright, finally you and I can have a discussion with no insults maybe.

Point #1. I just think a lot of people make him out to be better than he actually may be. I think its quite possible that he could be a fly by night "hot flash" and I will alway beleive that until he proves otherwise, and I just dont think people bringing up his WPT 2nd, and his PLO 10th qualifies as staying power yet.

Point #2. You are right about that, but I also beleive MM has had problems with being action hungry too, right?

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
Probably b/c you open yourself up to it

[/ QUOTE ]

Because my opinion of MM doesnt coincide with the majority opinion Im open game for personal insults?

You dont know what your talking about/you dont know how to play/ what have you done/ you dont understand poker..........etc....etc....etc???

I thought this was America?

I have no problem with people expressing their opinions, but just because you dont agree with mine doesnt give one the right to sling personal insults, am I right?

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
Because my opinion of MM doesnt coincide with the majority opinion

[/ QUOTE ]

No, your description of the majority opinion doesn't coincide with the actual majority opinion

[B-Man]

nm

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Probably b/c you open yourself up to it

[/ QUOTE ]

Because my opinion of MM doesnt coincide with the majority opinion Im open game for personal insults?

You dont know what your talking about/you dont know how to play/ what have you done/ you dont understand poker..........etc....etc....etc???

I thought this was America?

I have no problem with people expressing their opinions, but just because you dont agree with mine doesnt give one the right to sling personal insults, am I right?

[/ QUOTE ]


BTW, I don't think you do know what you're talking about. AS I posted in another thread, you are comparing Chris MoneyMaker to Huck Seed and you keep thinking that Chris will have the same fate as Huck Seed. So, what just is that fate? 4 WSOP bracelets for Seed over the course of almost 10 years. He won his first in 1994, second in 1996, third in 2000 and won another last year (2003). I didn't realize these so-called "HOT FLASHES" last ten years. I actually understand your point and I think that's exactly what happened to Varkonyi. Whether or not we will ever hear of Chris Moneymaker becoming a major force on the tournament circuit is to be seen, but I'm pretty sure at the end of the day if you asked Chris Moneymaker if it was OK to be compared to Huck Seed, he'd say ABSOLUTELY. The dude has 4 WSOP bracelets and only 23 people have four or more WSOP bracelets.

That's why you open yourself up to it, you tried to make a point and it really seems as if you have no clue.

BTW, this is definitely America and you have every right to say whatever you wish, but doesn't everyone else have a right to debate that with you?

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
The dude has 4 WSOP bracelets

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but he rarely ever pays his own entry fees and is constantly broke and borrowing money.

[ QUOTE ]
but doesn't everyone else have a right to debate that with you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes they absolutely do, but there is a big differnece between debating and making personal insults and attacks, right?

[tiltboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I still can't figure out for the life of me why every time I make a post on here I get personal attacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

What exactly was the personal attack in BEP's post? That you could better spend your time elsewhere? I guess if I point out that I think you are being too sensitive I'm making a personal attack too.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
What is his resume? A little over a year ago, he had little or no bankroll and was playing $40 tournys on stars.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was a winning player that grinded his way up from low limits to 10/20 on Stars, and was making decent money in their 10/20 game. He then improved his game significantly with the best learning experience possible - winning the world series of poker. After getting second in this years WSOP, Dave Williams said something to the effect of, "I learned more in this event from watching an expert play than I have learned in years of online play" (paraphrased).

Moneymaker is a smart guy. I certainly don't think he's one of the best 10 poker players in the world or anything, but he's almost certainly +ev in any major tournament he can find.

[cornell2005]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The dude has 4 WSOP bracelets

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but he rarely ever pays his own entry fees and is constantly broke and borrowing money.

[ QUOTE ]


man i hate telling someone on the internet they are dumb, but you have to be. 1. the fact that he does or doesnt pay his own entry fees diminishes nothing from the fact that he has 4 wsop bracelets. 2. you have no idea how much money he has, how "broke" he is, or who pays his entries.

but i have a feeling you arnt open to logic, because ive read your posts and the logical replies that others have made to them and it hasnt sunk in yet. oh well, i really do hope you learn to think at some point. GL

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but he rarely ever pays his own entry fees and is constantly broke and borrowing money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that, but that has nothing to do with his skill as a poker player, which is what was your original point in this topic and the MM threads in general. And, by this rationale, does that mean that you think Stu Ungar was a horrible player as he was constantly broke and never paid his own fees either?

[ QUOTE ]
Yes they absolutely do, but there is a big differnece between debating and making personal insults and attacks, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed!

[carpola]

T.J. Cloutier was backed by Lyle Berman for many years...may still be...but would this diminish his poker ability?

[Oski]

Why does Moneymaker have to be anything? I've never heard of him going around claiming to be the best poker player. He is just a guy who played poker recreationally, then won the big one. With his new wealth and notoriety, he is free to play poker full time. It seems, he has even become better after the WSOP and he had a good year by any standards.

Why would he be that differnt than a Phil Gordon or any other person who all of a sudden came into the means to be a full time player. He obviously has talent, and seems to lead a more steady life than the other "burnouts" he compared with.

I say this is a tired subject and he owes nobody anything, especially not an explaination as to why he is a poker celebrity.

[BusterStacks]

Moneymaker is also a gracious "celebrity", if you ever see him he will shake your hand and talk with you from what I've read in numerous articles. Why do you really care anyway? Nobody wins a tourney without a little bit of luck, it just so happens his luck came against some good players so it was more pronounced. Facts are facts:

a) he won a WSOP
b) he would own the crap out of you in a NL tourney

you are just like that kid on "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back". Talking **** on the internet. I hope Moneymaker knocks on your door and kicks your ass.

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
Moneymaker is also a gracious "celebrity", if you ever see him he will shake your hand and talk with you from what I've read in numerous articles. Why do you really care anyway? Nobody wins a tourney without a little bit of luck, it just so happens his luck came against some good players so it was more pronounced. Facts are facts:

a) he won a WSOP
b) he would own the crap out of you in a NL tourney

you are just like that kid on "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back". Talking **** on the internet. I hope Moneymaker knocks on your door and kicks your ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

Buster, I have to agree with you on most of this, but I don't think you can necessarily say that B is necessarily true. Sincere might be a good NL tourney player himself and it's not absolute that MM would wipe him out. I mean isn't that what someone would have said if MM made a similar post himself prior to the 2003 WSOP?

The problem I think a couple of posters like Sincere and Al Capone Junior have is that they fail to understand that the internet is a great learning ground for players. They are dealt a ton of hands and no doubt have the ability to hammer down the mathemetical and mechanical aspect of the game. Granted there are a ton of skills that don't transfer from online to B&M play, but there are skills being learned via internet games that are obviously making some players very good in the B&M setting.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
Moneymaker is also a gracious "celebrity", if you ever see him he will shake your hand and talk with you from what I've read in numerous articles. Why do you really care anyway? Nobody wins a tourney without a little bit of luck, it just so happens his luck came against some good players so it was more pronounced. Facts are facts:

a) he won a WSOP
b) he would own the crap out of you in a NL tourney


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget to add:

c) Just finished in top ten in recent WSOP PLO8 tourney


P.S. I found Moneymaker's demeanor during the recent WPT telecast to be polite and classy, compared to the nonsense exhibited by players like Laak, Flack, Helmuth, etc.

[Syntax]

[ QUOTE ]
I still can't figure out for the life of me why every time I make a post on here I get personal attacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but weren't you the one that started a thread personally attacking Chris Moneymaker? WTF?

[Dilbert]

You are Sincerely warped. Even Mason has posted that Chris is a good poker player. Anyone who wins the WSOP has been favored by luck in the process (including Greg and Stu). I sense envy.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this was America?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's where you're wrong. You're in 2+2. We're an independent entity.

[Sincere]

Chris Moneymaker is a public figure/celebrity, and I wasnt attacking him personally. I was just saying he is given to much credit as a player. No different than if someone were debating football and claiming Michael Vick was over-rated as a player, which I've seen debated on message boards time and time again. No different than debating if Kobe is as good as MJ? He is a public celebrity, that is the difference.

[SaintAces]

I still can't figure out for the life of me how [ QUOTE ]

My main problem with Sincere is that he spent 10 minutes of his time writing up yet another post which basically paints Moneymaker as a lucky bastard who doesn't deserve any of this when the fact of the matter is that he is a SOLID NL tourney player who has a damn bracelet. Your time is better spent trying to improve your own game rather than worrying about whether CM is "good" or "great."

[/ QUOTE ]
is a personal insult


please elaborate

[balt999]

I think Envy is a huge factor is Sincere's problem with Moneymaker. It's human nature to be envious of someone who's accomplished something a lot of people dream of.

[Ilovephysics]

<shameless music reference to quote "What About Bob?">

Sincere: Best way I can think about it is that it would be akin to saying {insert name here} pop star can't sing worth a dime... The problem is, there are always going to be those people who do enjoy their music that will use the logic "Well, if you can sing better, why don't you!" against your claim... which is basically one argument that you simply can't win...

As the great Bob Wiley once said, "There are those who like Neil Diamond, and those who don't."
</shameless music reference to quote "What About Bob?">

I think the same holds with MM and poker... It is very easy for people to rip on your post simply because, let's face it, not many people have won a WSOP main event... That's not exactly fair to you, and it isn't fair for anyone, really... heck, it was hard enough to beat 200 people, let alone 2,500... A lot of lesser-name pitchers like Tom Browning have thrown perfect games in baseball, but so have the likes of Nolan Ryan and Randy Johnson... I think it is too soon on MM... and maybe there are a lot of players like MM out there who just need that one big break to go their way...

In any event, think we are all smart enough to understand your point: I.e., If MM finished 37th at the WSOP instead of 1st, perhaps we would have never heard from him again... That may be a fair statement. Winning a few million dollars may make anyone think twice about their current job, too.. Heck, I saw that Robert Varkoni's wife made a final table on some recent Fox Sports telecast event, too... Would she have been playing had her husband not won the WSOP? Who knows? And sure, perhaps winning begets winning... (or just having a few million in the bank so you can play every tournament under the sun until you finally win a few)...

[Ilovephysics]

Further, MM has a *great* poker name. Seriously, how can you not root for a guy with that name being a pro player.. it's like a basketball player named 'Dunkmachine'...

[Army Eye]

[ QUOTE ]
Now to me, a 2nd, a 10th, and a collapse isnt much of a resume to back up a WSOP win. He's done a little, but not a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like a very good resume to me considering the limited amount of events he played. It's not like he was bumping around playing every tourney.

[ QUOTE ]
But, the funny thing is, like Sklansky said, these "hot flashes" can last for a long time, and with a 2.5 million score, Im sure he will be around for a while more. He may even win a few more tournments, but how successfull will he be overall? That book is still open. Now I dont think MM is a bad player. I think he is a good player, but I dont think he is a great player.


[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the 'hot flash' theory regarding cash game players?


Also, I don't think Moneymaker has taken poker by storm like Huck did. Who are these throngs of people who think Moneymaker is 'poker god' or 'great'? I think most people recognize now that he's a solid tourney player who has done enough to prove he wasn't a fluke.

[Sincere]

This is one of the first logical responses I've heard in a week. You arent agreeing or disagreeing with me, but sticking to the topics and facts.

[ QUOTE ]
In any event, think we are all smart enough to understand your point: I.e., If MM finished 37th at the WSOP instead of 1st, perhaps we would have never heard from him again... That may be a fair statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no doubt a lot of smart people on 2+2, but I dont think many of them are exactly understanding my point. If MM goes out to Humberto, or plays into a big hand by Chan, or makes a mistake against Ivey and doesnt hit the river would we hear from him again? I dont know. Would he have placed second in a WPT event? I dont know, he probably wouldnt have even had the money to enter, etc, etc, etc. Your response is a breath of fresh air.

[Sincere]

LOL, very true. I dont even really like MM, but still find it hard to root against him.

[namknils]

Sincere - Your problem with Chris is that he won the $2,500,000 and you didn't. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif I'm mad at a number of NBA players because I wish is was me. But when I look at it honestly, I drink waaayyy too much beer to be a professional athlete. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Life sucks, then you die. (This is just an expression, I love life /images/graemlins/smile.gif)

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL, very true. I dont even really like MM, but still find it hard to root against him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey dude, there's nothing wrong with rooting for or against someone or for that matter, liking or disliking anyone. However, I think that what most here have balked to is the fact that you and at least one other poster appear to have gone out of their way to bash the buy. What I have objected to is the fact that you can't admit that the guy is at least a "good" player. I'm not saying he's great or appears to be the next Poker God, but the guy appears good. I mean just compare him to Varkonyi, who would you label as the better player?

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
What I have objected to is the fact that you can't admit that the guy is at least a "good" player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, you are way off base. You are also one of the guys who has kept up with my and helped my thread grow, so I respect and value your input, but I have on atleast 2 occasions stated that I beleive MM is a "good" or close to very good player. I dont know if he was that good during his WSOP run, and feel he got really luck a number of times, which leads me to question if he would be hear and talked about today if he wouldve finished 28th or something.

At the time of their wins, MM was probably a better player than Varkoni. But it is very hard to say who is better now. Varkoni has been working with a very knowledgeble coach, MM seems to be learning from experience only. Just because MM has had a little success means nothing in the big scheme of things. Flunctuation is a very tricky and decieving thing. Who is to say MM falls off the face of the earth and Varkoni wins a few events this year. I dont know, but I imagine both are probably close in ability. Im babbling now so I'll shut it.

[Sincere]

Well you have a brain right? Use it.

It is probably a personal insult because of the fact that, that post had nothing what-so-ever to do with the topic at hand, and had everything to do with insinuating that my opinion isnt necessary and I am not worthy of starting a discussion.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Envy is a huge factor is Sincere's problem with Moneymaker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you hit the nail on the head.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Who are these throngs of people who think Moneymaker is 'poker god' or 'great'?

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't exist. Sincere invented them as a straw so he could have an argument with himself.

[Easy E]

Sorry, it's too early to determine if he's a solid player or not.

See me two years from now.

[sleepyjoeyt]

I wrote a rather scathing response last week which was apparently deleted so I'll try to be a little more civil now:

Where did someone sling a personal insult at you?

All I read is you saying Moneymaker isn't that great, and others saying why not just worry about your own game and not about others.

Why did you take this as someone attacking you?

Why are you portraying yourself as some sort of victim?

Grow up.

[BreakEvenPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
You are also one of the guys who has kept up with my and helped my thread grow, so I respect and value your input

[/ QUOTE ]

So that's what this is about?

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, it's too early to determine if he's a solid player or not.

See me two years from now.

[/ QUOTE ]

You shouldn't need two years to determine whether a player is solid or not. It shouldn't take more than two hours of playing with him. If you're only seeing the guy on TV, you can have a little more time.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Further, MM has a *great* poker name. Seriously, how can you not root for a guy with that name being a pro player.. it's like a basketball player named 'Dunkmachine'...

[/ QUOTE ]
Or if a golfer was named Woods...oh, never mind. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[charlie_t_jr]

[quoteYou shouldn't need two years to determine whether a player is solid or not. It shouldn't take more than two hours of playing with him. If you're only seeing the guy on TV, you can have a little more time.

[/ QUOTE ]

But we forget he's really just starting out. I'm just starting out, and hope 2 years of experience and study does much for my game.

Question is will MM improve during the next 2yrs or fade away...

[coolcody]

You are all on a bunch of bad beats.