Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

I found it extremely irritating when she asked for Raymer's count (I think 1.3mil) and he answered clear and concise, but she wanted it again. It was as if she completely ignored his answer and only believed the dealer.

As far as the amount of skill it took for her to get there, she knows that Aces are high, and suited cards are pretty.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

[ QUOTE ]
I found it extremely irritating when she asked for Raymer's count (I think 1.3mil) and he answered clear and concise, but she wanted it again. It was as if she completely ignored his answer and only believed the dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if Raymer miscounted and really had 2.3 million...or maybe just conveniently forgot what he had and 'guessed' wrong? I know Greg always knows how many chips he has and wouldn't angle shoot like that but still...aren't you just taking your opponent's word for it when they give you their chip count? Why not get an official count?

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

[ QUOTE ]
there's no way she was getting pot odds to call a raise, reraise, third raise with KJ.

there's just no way.

if the blinds were a theoretical 1/2 and all raises were min-raises, then there'd be 3 in from the blinds, and raises of 4, 6, and 8. she'd need to call 8 to win 21, that's 2.5-1, with several left to act and 2 candidates for a call.

I can't find any way for her to rationalize how long she took there.

now, i switch sides. she finished in the top 20 out of 5600(is that right) by getting lucky, and only by getting lucky? i pass.

[/ QUOTE ]

She mucked, didn't she? Maybe she is a really good actress who took the whole "boy I'm laying down this time but you better watch it next time" agonizing act far enough to be believable for once.

After that performance, you would seriously worry about shoving in with a 99, knowing she might just call you with KJ.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there's no way she was getting pot odds to call a raise, reraise, third raise with KJ.

there's just no way.

if the blinds were a theoretical 1/2 and all raises were min-raises, then there'd be 3 in from the blinds, and raises of 4, 6, and 8. she'd need to call 8 to win 21, that's 2.5-1, with several left to act and 2 candidates for a call.

I can't find any way for her to rationalize how long she took there.

now, i switch sides. she finished in the top 20 out of 5600(is that right) by getting lucky, and only by getting lucky? i pass.

[/ QUOTE ]

She mucked, didn't she? Maybe she is a really good actress who took the whole "boy I'm laying down this time but you better watch it next time" agonizing act far enough to be believable for once.

After that performance, you would seriously worry about shoving in with a 99, knowing she might just call you with KJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

She didn't show it. I think it's more likely that if she were acting she was trying to induce a bluff later on by convincing her table that she could be forced to lay down a monster hand.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I found it extremely irritating when she asked for Raymer's count (I think 1.3mil) and he answered clear and concise, but she wanted it again. It was as if she completely ignored his answer and only believed the dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if Raymer miscounted and really had 2.3 million...or maybe just conveniently forgot what he had and 'guessed' wrong? I know Greg always knows how many chips he has and wouldn't angle shoot like that but still...aren't you just taking your opponent's word for it when they give you their chip count? Why not get an official count?

[/ QUOTE ]

farha used that move; i read it on a cardplayer update. he pushed in; the guy asked him how much he had, an he said 500k, when it was only 70k or so. you can lie about your stack all you want, which is why it's smart to have a dealer count.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

were they hand to hand at this point or does anyone think she may have been trying to sneak up a few spots in the $?

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

My wife's comment (who watches about 30 minutes of poker a year and hasn't played a game beyond war):
"How did she make it this far in?"

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

Looking at the Cardplayer.com report, they were around 37 at this point, and was about a 40k difference between 36th and 37th. I don't think they were doing H4H between the various money levels, maybe when it was at 28 there was something like that.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I found it extremely irritating when she asked for Raymer's count (I think 1.3mil) and he answered clear and concise, but she wanted it again. It was as if she completely ignored his answer and only believed the dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if Raymer miscounted and really had 2.3 million...or maybe just conveniently forgot what he had and 'guessed' wrong? I know Greg always knows how many chips he has and wouldn't angle shoot like that but still...aren't you just taking your opponent's word for it when they give you their chip count? Why not get an official count?

[/ QUOTE ]

farha used that move; i read it on a cardplayer update. he pushed in; the guy asked him how much he had, an he said 500k, when it was only 70k or so. you can lie about your stack all you want, which is why it's smart to have a dealer count.

[/ QUOTE ]

Farha was joking - he had under 20K if I recall correctly, and said "about 700K or so." Anyone who took the time to look at his stack would realize he was not serious.

Re: What Tiffany Willaimson did right
 

There is no law against being a bad player and getting lucky and advancing deep in a tourney. I won a MTT on Party two months ago where I cracked Aces twice all-in preflop in the second hour. I think I played poorly in that tourney, yet I won, and I have no reason to feel guilty about it.

The only objectionable thing Tiffany did in my opinion was taking forever to make decisions. While this would certainly be annoying at the table, none of us (other than Fossilman) was at the table with her so our lives were not adversely affected.

Thirdly, calling someone a moron (or moran, maroon, or one of the many other spellings I have seen on here) becuase he/she is a bad player is simply not justified. She is an attorney who plays poker for fun, got lucky, won a seat, and advanced very deep in the WSOP. Who cares if she got lucky in a ton of key pots? That is no reason to have to defend yourself. Would anyone on here forfeit their prize money from a tourney if he advanced much further than he should have? I notice people on here are very hostile to the players that make poker profitable for them. If you think someone is a "donkey", that is a reason to be polite and and encourage him or her to play more, not to complain if he/she happens to get lucky.

Tiffany is good for poker, whereas players like Stillman and Friedman are bad for poker. She handled herself with class, didn't go crazy when sucking out on players, and didn't berate others. It is a good story when a 1/2 player makes it this far in a tourney. Tiffany, good luck in the future, don't listen to what the people on here are saying.