Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

2002 had many notable plays, Gardner is a great player and doesn't Ralph Perry play in like the biggest games?

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

If I kept it at nine then I would have to include Matusow for 2005 and both Minh Ly and Tony D for 2002. 2005 would still be bad because Matusow, as good as he is, would not be enough to lift the group above the historically low level that they are in. But Ly and Tony D would have too positive an effect because Tony D has often been named the greatest heads up NL player in the world while Ly is a highly respected very high stakes player, and that wouldn't be good because I really really want to make 2002 the worst ever. Thus, the top seven instead of top nine.

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
The worst WSOP final table ever was either 2002 or 2005.

2002 top seven:
Robert Varkonyi
Julian Gardner
Ralph Perry
Scott Gray
Harley Hall
Russell Rosenbloom
John Shipley

2005 top seven:
Joseph Hachem
Steve Dannenmann
John Barch
Aaron Kanter
Andrew Black
Scott Lazaar
Daniel Bergsdorf

I challenge you to find a worse WSOP final tables than these two. Here is a link where the final table finishers are listed.

[/ QUOTE ]

A challenge? Worst final table ever? This was really really easy.

1971. Only six participants in the damn thing. Everybody made the final table and there wasn't even a full table. Not only that, the buy-in was $5000 Its not just the quality of the competition on the final table its the difficulty involved in getting to the final table.

Only 1972 rivals 1971 as far as ease of making the final table and that one edges 1971 for not quite being the worst final table ever because the buy-in went up to 10k and Amarillo Slim one and then went on Carson and other outlets and gave the tourney the Pub it needed to put it on the track to where it is today.

I don't care if Johnny Moss did beat Puggy Pearson in 1971 and Puggy himself went on to win in 1973. That 1971 final table was much worse than 2002 and 2005, without a doubt.

--Zetack

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The worst WSOP final table ever was either 2002 or 2005.

2002 top seven:
Robert Varkonyi
Julian Gardner
Ralph Perry
Scott Gray
Harley Hall
Russell Rosenbloom
John Shipley

2005 top seven:
Joseph Hachem
Steve Dannenmann
John Barch
Aaron Kanter
Andrew Black
Scott Lazaar
Daniel Bergsdorf

I challenge you to find a worse WSOP final tables than these two. Here is a link where the final table finishers are listed.

[/ QUOTE ]

A challenge? Worst final table ever? This was really really easy.

1971. Only six participants in the damn thing. Everybody made the final table and there wasn't even a full table. Not only that, the buy-in was $5000 Its not just the quality of the competition on the final table its the difficulty involved in getting to the final table.

Only 1972 rivals 1971 as far as ease of making the final table and that one edges 1971 for not quite being the worst final table ever because the buy-in went up to 10k and Amarillo Slim one and then went on Carson and other outlets and gave the tourney the Pub it needed to put it on the track to where it is today.

I don't care if Johnny Moss did beat Puggy Pearson in 1971 and Puggy himself went on to win in 1973. That 1971 final table was much worse than 2002 and 2005, without a doubt.

--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

I know it seems paradoxical, but the final table when there were only 6 or 8 entries was much stronger than the final table with 5700 entries. When there were 6 entries, they were all very strong players. With 5700 entries, most of the field is amateurs and grinder-type pros.

The players making it to the final table with 5700 are not all top players. I wouldn't even put Black and Barch in the same league with Brunson and Moss.

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The worst WSOP final table ever was either 2002 or 2005.

2002 top seven:
Robert Varkonyi
Julian Gardner
Ralph Perry
Scott Gray
Harley Hall
Russell Rosenbloom
John Shipley

2005 top seven:
Joseph Hachem
Steve Dannenmann
John Barch
Aaron Kanter
Andrew Black
Scott Lazaar
Daniel Bergsdorf

I challenge you to find a worse WSOP final tables than these two. Here is a link where the final table finishers are listed.

[/ QUOTE ]

A challenge? Worst final table ever? This was really really easy.

1971. Only six participants in the damn thing. Everybody made the final table and there wasn't even a full table. Not only that, the buy-in was $5000 Its not just the quality of the competition on the final table its the difficulty involved in getting to the final table.

Only 1972 rivals 1971 as far as ease of making the final table and that one edges 1971 for not quite being the worst final table ever because the buy-in went up to 10k and Amarillo Slim one and then went on Carson and other outlets and gave the tourney the Pub it needed to put it on the track to where it is today.

I don't care if Johnny Moss did beat Puggy Pearson in 1971 and Puggy himself went on to win in 1973. That 1971 final table was much worse than 2002 and 2005, without a doubt.

--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

I know it seems paradoxical, but the final table when there were only 6 or 8 entries was much stronger than the final table with 5700 entries. When there were 6 entries, they were all very strong players. With 5700 entries, most of the field is amateurs and grinder-type pros.

The players making it to the final table with 5700 are not all top players. I wouldn't even put Black and Barch in the same league with Brunson and Moss.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe the original question was which was the weakest final table, it was which was the worst. For my money, a final table with a smaller buy-in, where none of the finalists had to beat a single player to make it, is a table that hasn't displayed any skill, stamina, luck, or ability to outplay a soul. Its a table where the only displayed skill is the ability to plunk down $5,000 dollars.

A table full of players who have been lucky, skillful, and mentally resilient enough to outlast a huge field of other players including dozens of the top tourney players and cash game players in the world is a far superior table to one full of players who have demonstrated the ability to sit down.

--Zetack

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

I think you guys are mostly arguing context. Obviously, the final tables from the early seventies can't stack up, much in the same way Babe Ruth pales in comparison to Barry Bonds in terms of the actual skill set thanks to technological and strategic advances. Game theory back then was mostly instinctual and the players didn't have the benefit of the ten thousand of books today's players have, nor the number of peers with which to discuss the game for improvement purposes.

That said, if you're arguing which tables are the best/worst of their time, a big part of the reason those early tournaments were so small is because everyone knew not to mess with the Rounders, who were way further ahead of the field than today's stars. Personally, I link 'best' with greatness and greatness with dominance. As a result, for me, '70 and '71 are among my best.

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys are mostly arguing context. Obviously, the final tables from the early seventies can't stack up, much in the same way Babe Ruth pales in comparison to Barry Bonds in terms of the actual skill set thanks to technological and strategic advances. Game theory back then was mostly instinctual and the players didn't have the benefit of the ten thousand of books today's players have, nor the number of peers with which to discuss the game for improvement purposes.

That said, if you're arguing which tables are the best/worst of their time, a big part of the reason those early tournaments were so small is because everyone knew not to mess with the Rounders, who were way further ahead of the field than today's stars. Personally, I link 'best' with greatness and greatness with dominance. As a result, for me, '70 and '71 are among my best.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh come on, even in those terms the 70's final tables just a few years later are more impressive. Get the thing up to 18 participants, two full tables, with all the cream of the NL world there...

--Zetack

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
No he was literally the best player you never heard of, similiar to Allen Cunningham before this year...

[/ QUOTE ]

If you hadnt heard of Allen Cunningham....well your not much of a poker aficianado. Allen is a better cash game player than ANYONE at the 2004 final table and very well might be better at tourneys than anyone there as well. The guy is a serious contender for top 25 players in the world and possibly top 10.

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd have to disagree on 2002. Rosenbloom, Gardner and Shipley are all top players.


[/ QUOTE ]

Also, Rosenblum was a 2+2er.

Re: Worst WSOP Final Table Ever
 

what made you think williams was strong?
everything shown of him were bad plays.
but this debate has already been done