|
|
#11
06-11-2004, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
[ 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 
|
|
#13
06-11-2004, 07:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
[ 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?
|
|
#14
06-11-2004, 07:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with 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?
|
|
#15
06-11-2004, 07:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
[ 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.
|
|
#16
06-11-2004, 07:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Moneymaker.
[ 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.
|
|
#17
06-11-2004, 08:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
[ 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
|
|
#18
06-11-2004, 10:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
[ 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!
|
|
#20
06-12-2004, 01:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My main problem with Sincere.
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.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
