Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

So we all saw Greg put on a CLINIC last year in the main event when it comes to playing with a big stack. The final table was filled with little known pros and amateurs (besides Harrington) and Greg was able to shine as he worked his way to the finish line.

Will <font color="red">(edit: WOULD)</font> he be able to play the same game against the "big names" who are preceived to be world class players that are left in the field <font color="red">were it</font> to come down to more of a star-studded final table?? Ivey? Lederer? Juanda? Matusow? JC Tran?

Discuss.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

You of course assume that anyone named, including Greg, will make the final stages. Lotta way to go till the finish line.

Phill

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

That'll be Raymer's best hope if he makes it to the final table: try to get all-in as a coin flip. I don't think we'll see Greg trying to put any moves on Ivy post-flop.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

[/ QUOTE ]You wanna name all of those hands? I can think of one or two. His play was exactly what one should do with a big stack. You also ignore the fact that he was taking millions of dollars in chips literally with his play because ESPN doesn't show the multitude of times the table folded to his many aggressive raises. Raymer played just fine.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

[/ QUOTE ]You wanna name all of those hands? I can think of one or two. His play was exactly what one should do with a big stack. You also ignore the fact that he was taking millions of dollars in chips literally with his play because ESPN doesn't show the multitude of times the table folded to his many aggressive raises. Raymer played just fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not talking about what was shown on ESPN. I watched the entire final table multiple times on pokerstars where you saw every hand. And I never said he played badly, I just didn't think it was anything unbelievable. He played decent poker and got lucky a few times. I think Greg is a tremendous player, and I thought that before he won the WSOP. But you Raymer groupies have to chill out.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not talking about what was shown on ESPN. I watched the entire final table multiple times on pokerstars where you saw every hand. And I never said he played badly, I just didn't think it was anything unbelievable. He played decent poker and got lucky a few times. I think Greg is a tremendous player, and I thought that before he won the WSOP. But you Raymer groupies have to chill out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand. How did you watch the final table on pokerstars?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that this was how TV depicted several situations, isn't part of playing with a big stack getting your money in when you may be a slight dog pre-flop, but if you hit you're now a huge favorite?

Also, I think "sucked out" is a bit of an extreme adjective for a lot of the situations Greg was in. I see sucking out as putting your money in after the flop or turn when you're getting thinner and thinner, and THEN hitting, not really putting it in pre-flop when your opportunities are the broadest. Especially when you figure in stack size.

I may be way off base, however... And I'm certainly not a "Raymer groupie"...

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

Pokerstars typically has a live "broadcast" of the final table. It looks like an MTT table, with the names of the WSOP players on it. As bets/showdowns are made on the real final table, the Stars table is updated.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Pokerstars typically has a live "broadcast" of the final table. It looks like an MTT table, with the names of the WSOP players on it. As bets/showdowns are made on the real final table, the Stars table is updated.

[/ QUOTE ]

very interesting ... i didn't know this. I don't suppose that this could be re-created with hand histories?

I'm very interested in watching this.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

Name one WSOP ME champion who didn't have numerous suckouts?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]

Name one WSOP ME champion who didn't have numerous suckouts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would guess all of them did. What is your point?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.

He's ripping through huge tournament fields!!

A player might come along and be able to it once (Varkonyi, Moneymaker).. but to come through Four huge WSOP fields over 2000+ people and into the money each time, (and 2 final tables, looking for #3)..

Raymer is solidifying himself as one of the greatest NL Holdem tournament players ever and into the realm of Ivey, Lederer, Brunson, Hellmuth, Chan, Cloutier!

He isn't doing this via dumb luck (Varkonyi) and several miracle two-outters (Moneymaker).

Raymer is a GREAT Tournament Poker Player!!

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Last year's final table kind of played itself due to the way the cards got dealt out. There wasn't a lot of "A outplays B" in any of the televised hands (not just the ones involving Greg, either). I found the 2003 final table to be more interesting from a bystander's perspective.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Last year's final table kind of played itself due to the way the cards got dealt out. There wasn't a lot of "A outplays B" in any of the televised hands (not just the ones involving Greg, either). I found the 2003 final table to be more interesting from a bystander's perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]
Looking at the hand transcripts at the time, it seemed that there was a lot of back and forth between Raymer and Arieh that never made it to TV.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
He isn't doing this via dumb luck (Varkonyi) and several miracle two-outters (Moneymaker).

[/ QUOTE ]

Several?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

I'm glad you backtracked from your original post where you implied in my mind that it was more a matter of luck than skill in that Greg "repeatedly" had the worst hand and sucked out. We could quibble what "repeatedly" means in the context of what you wrote. Hey I don't think we should be handing out any victories yet either but my impression from your first post in the thread was that his final table performance and ultimate victory was more a matter of luck than skill. Perhaps the lucky part was playing a relatively inexperienced player in a heads up confrontation. Greg stated that he was surprised that the heads up battle ended so quickly. Williams had a lot of chips compared to the blinds and FWIW could have made things a lot tougher for Greg.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hey I don't think we should be handing out any victories yet either but my impression from your first post in the thread was that his final table performance and ultimate victory was more a matter of luck than skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main reason he won was that he had acquired a huge stack before getting to the final table. I would guess this was done through a combination of luck and skill.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

Actually I think your original point was that negotiating your way through this big of field in two successive years is remarkable feat. Anyway long way to go, probably a lot of really good players left that could win.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
But you Raymer groupies have to chill out.

[/ QUOTE ]You made the following claim:[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out.

[/ QUOTE ]I asked you to name them. Either substantiate your claim or retract. This has nothing to do with being a "groupie," it has to do with YOUR claim.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But you Raymer groupies have to chill out.

[/ QUOTE ]You made the following claim:[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out.

[/ QUOTE ]I asked you to name them. Either substantiate your claim or retract. This has nothing to do with being a "groupie," it has to do with YOUR claim.

[/ QUOTE ]

He busted aces all in preflop for one.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

[/ QUOTE ]You wanna name all of those hands? I can think of one or two. His play was exactly what one should do with a big stack. You also ignore the fact that he was taking millions of dollars in chips literally with his play because ESPN doesn't show the multitude of times the table folded to his many aggressive raises. Raymer played just fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

I only saw what was on TV, but in Greg's ESPN commentary, he says that he had only 2 of what he would considered major suckouts in the ME, and that both were at the final table. (You know how poker players sometimes exaggerate.) I don't remember the hands, but both were shown, and both were big suckouts. I don't remember any other times on TV when he sucked out at the final table. And Greg got sucked out a couple times on the TV final table too.

Again, having only the TV hands to go on, Moneymaker sucked out incredibly more often in 2003 than Greg did in 2004. As Mike Caro says, no one ever won a major tournament without getting lucky, and Greg had his share of luck. I don't think he is in the same class as Doyle or Ivey or Lederer yet, but he is certainly an expert player, and when he is playing his "A" game and getting his share of breaks, he is hard to beat, even in the WSOP.

His commentary about the final table was very interesting. He said that when they were down to 10 players, and playing to the final 9 before stopping for the night, many players were only playing to avoid the cut. During that time, he was stealing as much as he could. He ran his stack from $5 mill to $8 mil during the 10-player session. Obviously, he needed a combination of luck and skill to get to that point with $5 mil, but he knew what to do with it when he got there.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

What helped Greg the most was an amazing penchant for winning coin tosses. He ran incredibly hot in such situations which I believe is a lot more important to winning a tournament with a ton of players than sucking out a lot because a good player will not often be in a situation where they are a massive dog (and when they do, they will obviously lose more often than not) but there are a LOT of coin tosses involved given the nature of HE.

I can recall his Tens against Glen Hughes' Aces. I think that he had one more hand at the final table I cannot remember where he was a big dog when the money went in. But I don't see how two hands is "numerous" and I welcome someone to detail the hands I am missing here.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

Raymer had his Aces busted a couple times too.. Do you have a point?? Or are you just spewing a pile of $hit?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
He isn't doing this via dumb luck (Varkonyi) and several miracle two-outters (Moneymaker).


[/ QUOTE ]

Could you recount the several two-outers that Moneymaker hit?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Raymer had his Aces busted a couple times too.. Do you have a point?? Or are you just spewing a pile of $hit?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was asked a question, and I answered it.
I don't know what else I can do. Raymer seems like a good guy. He seems like an extremely strong player. I just don't think he did anything all that exciting at the final table last year. He played solid poker, had a big stack, and won. This is my last post in this thread, you guys can go back to looking at nude pix of Greg instead of reading my posts.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was asked a question, and I answered it.

[/ QUOTE ]No you didn't. You made a claim of "numerous times." Surely you can recall even a few of these "numerous" times above and beyond the two that I am willing to concede (Hughes' Aces and one other I cannot recall).

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

The only times I remember is the first hand, Aces (Wasn't it McClain or something?) and Tens (Raymer). Also I believe his A/T beat Mattias's A/K. Both were standard calls by Greg though.

JZ

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

The other suckout Raymer said he had the final table was his A10 vs Andersons AK when they got all the money in preflop and he ended up with a straight.

RZ

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
At the final table last year the other players repeatedly got all their chips in as favorites against Greg preflop and Greg sucked out. His stack going into the final table was impressive, but his final table play was nothing special.

[/ QUOTE ]

When play was ten handed, Greg got his stack from something like 5 mil to 8 mil without any altercations. He had almost twice as much as the second guy in chips when 9 handed play began.

He beat AA with TT and AK with AT, but that was pretty much it. He soundly took down Krux, beat Hughes in a coiinflip, took a humongous pot off Arieh and then eliminated him in a coinflip, and trounced Williams.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Raymer seems like a good guy. He seems like an extremely strong player. I just don't think he did anything all that exciting at the final table last year. He played solid poker, had a big stack, and won.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this 100%.

The question posed in the OP was; CAN he play the same game against some of the POSSIBLE other final tablers left in the field whose names carry a generally understood footnote of "world class"?

Anyone care to comment on their thoughts on this?

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

So if a much smaller stack goes allin, do you just muck your TT? Heck no, because a small stack will go allin with a wide variety of hands due to the increasing pressure of the blinds. The great thing about weilding the big stack is that you can absorb a couple of losses when trying to knock out a small stack, whereas any loss on the part of a short stack and you are out the door. The ATo call might have been slightly thin, but even AT is still better than a lot of hands a short stack might go with.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was asked a question, and I answered it.

[/ QUOTE ]No you didn't. You made a claim of "numerous times." Surely you can recall even a few of these "numerous" times above and beyond the two that I am willing to concede (Hughes' Aces and one other I cannot recall).

[/ QUOTE ]

two is a number [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is my last post in this thread, you guys can go back to looking at nude pix of Greg instead of reading my posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hahaha.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

....to get away from the sniping, and answer the OP's original question....

What Greg will do going forward is what he ALWAYS does....

...He will focus on making GOOD DECISIONS, and he will do his best to not let anything distract him from that goal.

Sounds kinda dull, huh?

If there is a "Magic Bullet" in poker, that simple sentence basically defines it. Some readers are not willing to accept this tenet; so be it......

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

If he has Ivey massively outchipped, you will certainly see him put moves on him or anyone else. Right now, it's still anyone's to win, but having a monster stack, and how good he is at beating people down with it, I like Raymer's chances.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

**whew!** Someone finally addressed the question in the OP.

1/33 aint so bad I suppose in the WPT forum... [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

Thanks Myrtle.

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

to be fair...the argument of "well he was a huge stack entering the final table, so his final table play was nothing spectacular.." argument is weak. how did he get that big stack in the first place? he played strong aggressive poker to accumulate those chips! my 2 cents

Re: Raymer and BIG STACK poker...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Could you recount the several two-outers that Moneymaker hit?

[/ QUOTE ]

He cracked AA with 88 with about 45 left. Flop comes K-J-4 or something like that and Moneymaker goes all-in. Gets called by the rockets, hits an eight on the turn. That was a two outer.

Against Ivey he had 7 outs. One queen, three aces and three of the other card on the board. (Board was Q-Q-x-9).

Those were the only two hands that I recall, and I just watched all 7 episodes the last week. He got lucky with A2 at the final table I think too, but that was a PF all-in call.

The push with 8s I was shocked with the play but it's not horrid if he put his opponent on a mid pair too. Or something.

He made some mistakes. More seen on television than Raymer made. Raymer never had his aces busted in the telecasts for which we saw him. He lost to a runner-runner flush to Al Krux but they were all-in PF. From what I can tell from Raymer's comments and from the telecasts, Raymer didn't really get lucky or unlucky a whole lot. Won more flips than not, and that's a big key.

Anyway, those are the 'suckouts' everyone complains about with Moneymaker. On the Q-Q-x board and he's holding A-Q, he bet almost nothing in comparison of the flop, let Ivey hit his boat, and then rivered a bigger boat. But in that situation, wouldn't you want Ivey to call a bet and bet small because of it? Everyone complains about that hand all the time, but I think Money played it fine.

It's just easy to gripe when we are on the outside looking in and have no reprocussion for our actions. I'd like to see most of us making the correct decisions for millions of dollars. It's tough.

As far as skill goes, Money is at least decent to win the big one in my opinion. Raymer I think is one of the top 5 poker players in the world right now. His results speak to that.

Anyway, those are the suckouts. Not horrible ones really.

Brad