Harrington or Raymer?

[ismisus]

Harrington is better.

[carpe2k]

Anyone know the number of players, the years Chan won?

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone know the number of players, the years Chan won?

[/ QUOTE ]

1987: 152 entries ($625,000)
1988: 167 entries ($700,000)
1989: 178 entries (2nd place, $302,000)

[d1sterbd]

Raymer's back to back years was more impressive.. but Harrington's ME resume is far better.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone know the number of players, the years Chan won?

[/ QUOTE ]

1987: 152 entries ($625,000)
1988: 167 entries ($700,000)
1989: 178 entries (2nd place, $302,000)

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes Chan's accomplishment the most improbable on its face, at 1 in 2.25 million. But Raymer would only need to finish in the top 1/4 of the field next year to match it.

[FoxwoodsFiend]

This is pretty obviously Raymer. Match up Raymer's win against Harrington's 4th last year and Raymer has the edge. The only question is whether winning out of 800 is more impressive than 25th out of 5600, and I don't think it is.

[DesertCat]

This poll's description of Raymer's accomplishment's was weak. Raymer's really impressive feat is that he's cashed in 4 straight 2500+ entrant WSOP tournaments, including two final tables and one win.

[Easy E]

Pointless to rate them

[10-20Jerome]

I dont like you, you oversee a forum but you always change the subject to your likeing. You want everone to know how smart you are and then if someone disagrees, esp. if there is any sort of what you conclude to be "out of line" you threated us with a ban. Dynasty get over your self [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[transmitt]

meant 3 finals, 1 win for 4, but I think we agree.