james mcmanus column in the nytimes

mikech · #1 10-09-2005, 01:49 AM

link

not sure if this is the right forum for it, but it'll do. a friend emailed me this article today and wow, it's really bad. he starts out with the point that AQ can be a trap hand, which is certainly valid in some situations, but he ends with two examples from the 2000 main event final table where AQ got all-in preflop against A4 and A9 respectively and ended up losing both times. his conclusion? "At that table at least, Cloutier and I both should have listened to Brunson. [whom mcmanus quotes as having said, 'i try never to play this hand.']"

i thought "positively 5th street" was a great read, but after his acting like a crotchety old fart last year telling ellix powers he was "disrespecting the game," and now reading this, mcmanus is looking a lot like a results-oriented nit who probably sucks at poker.

FrankStallone · #2 10-09-2005, 02:15 AM

your disrespecting the game..

Voltron87 · #3 10-09-2005, 02:18 AM

he is a pathetic excuse for a writer, i cant stand most of his stuff. postively 5th street was a good read, but the worst parts were the parts most about him showing what a dolt he is.

his times columns are beyond bad, i mean he doesnt actually take himself seriously does he?

mikech · #4 10-09-2005, 02:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
your disrespecting the game..

[/ QUOTE ]
yes, but that's cuz i'm down.

slickpoppa · #5 10-09-2005, 02:55 AM

He's written some decent columns before, but this one was complete trash. Once he mentions Cloutier's book it's over.

mosta · #6 10-09-2005, 03:12 PM

you should try reading his "poetry."

I liked his Harper's article. It was the first step that got me into poker. But from the very beginning, the "writing" in that article, as opposed to the straight poker, was embarrassingly bad.

octop · #7 10-10-2005, 04:22 AM

I read this trash the other day
Great points using 2 examples of AQ being sucked out as a heavy favorite to show why aq sucks

betgo · #8 10-10-2005, 09:39 AM

I am amased he is still allowed to right for the NYT after his ridiculous review of HOH and SS2. The review just summarized the topics in the books, like he read the dust jacket and table of contents. I know the NYT doesn't have much standards, but that would have been given an F if submitted as a middle school book report.

#9 10-10-2005, 04:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I am amased he is still allowed to right for the NYT after his ridiculous review of HOH and SS2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed.

Anyway, regardless of what you all think of his writing, don't read too much into his comments to Ellix Powers; ESPN edits the table talk in a most interesting way. I believe there was a recent CP article in which McManus describes what a jerk Powers had been up to that point.