From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

Well anyway... ROOT FOR IVEY!!!!! I promise its the best thing for poker if he wins... If Ivey wins, the ratings on the ESPN show will be so rediculous, you wont even have to be a winning player anymore to make a living playing poker..... so GO PHIL IVEY!!!!!!!!!!!

What are everyone's thoughts on this? Agree?

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

he should learn how to spell

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

how many bad players will he bring in if he wins? all i can see happening is more blacks playing and maybe a little bit more fish

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]

At the end of his entry is this.

p.s.. I'm too tired to proof this

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

slow day?

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

definately

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

I don't understand how it can be the best thing for poker. Wouldn't it just prove that you have to be a top player to do well? I'm confused by his statement completely. I don't see any logic in it. Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

slow day?

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, some people get it for a great point by point analysis of the play of a hand, or for discussing a new way to play a big stack in an MTT. I get it for being a sarcastic dick. 2+2, I love ya.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well anyway... ROOT FOR IVEY!!!!! I promise its the best thing for poker if he wins... If Ivey wins, the ratings on the ESPN show will be so rediculous, you wont even have to be a winning player anymore to make a living playing poker..... so GO PHIL IVEY!!!!!!!!!!!

What are everyone's thoughts on this? Agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

How can u be losing poker player make a living playing poker? I think i know what he meant, but in his hyper active over reacting way he said it like a retard. I lost all respect for this guy when i saw him breat a player for calling him with a draw during a side game at the taj.

Will iveys win broaden the scope of poker... i think pokers having no problem broadening its target audience now, will ivey winning make that big of a difference maybe?

And being a winning player is a constantly changing spectrum depending on your opponents ur play and ur mind set.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

definately

[/ QUOTE ]

you should learn how to spell. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he should learn how to spell

[/ QUOTE ]
That request is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

funniest post of the day.

[/ QUOTE ]


slow day?

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, some people get it for a great point by point analysis of the play of a hand, or for discussing a new way to play a big stack in an MTT. I get it for being a sarcastic dick. 2+2, I love ya.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the subtle humor, gets me everytime.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how it can be the best thing for poker. Wouldn't it just prove that you have to be a top player to do well? I'm confused by his statement completely. I don't see any logic in it. Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is, Varkonyi, Moneymaker, etc. have already won, and everybody knows it. There's no need to prove to the public, yet again, that "anyone can win."

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

When I hear about what is good for poker I think of what will bring the most uneducated and most inexperienced money into the system for experienced players to take. Given that premise, I would say that the best two possible 2005 WSOP outcomes would be:

1. A total unknown wins it (ala Moneymaker)
2. Raymer wins it again (or Moneymaker but he's already out right?)

I'm not sure which order they should be in though. I can see it either way.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

[/ QUOTE ]

you can't be serious with this question. moneymaker winning in 2003, in conjunction with the huge ratings jump for the world series on espn, was easily the single greatest thing to happen for poker's popularity

FWIW im with the consensus that Ivey winning (or finishing very strong) would be the best thing for poker in terms of keeping the popularity train going.
the way josh worded it was pretty stupid though. that guy can be a real idiot.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

I agree with Arieh.

An unknown (in so far as Greg was "unknown" a year ago) has won three years in a row. It's not like its necessary for somebody else to step forward and win in order for people to believe its possible.

The poker industry has generally done a good job creating and marketing a pantheon of stars. But if Ivey wins it will have its first real superstar, one that is telegenic, young, and a bona fide great all around poker player.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

[/ QUOTE ]

you can't be serious with this question. moneymaker winning in 2003, in conjunction with the huge ratings jump for the world series on espn, was easily the single greatest thing to happen for poker's popularity

FWIW im with the consensus that Ivey winning (or finishing very strong) would be the best thing for poker in terms of keeping the popularity train going.
the way josh worded it was pretty stupid though. that guy can be a real idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not serious. It's a rhetorical question.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

[/ QUOTE ]

you can't be serious with this question. moneymaker winning in 2003, in conjunction with the huge ratings jump for the world series on espn, was easily the single greatest thing to happen for poker's popularity

FWIW im with the consensus that Ivey winning (or finishing very strong) would be the best thing for poker in terms of keeping the popularity train going.
the way josh worded it was pretty stupid though. that guy can be a real idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not serious. It's a rhetorical question.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok. well my point is i can't even imagine a world in which moneymaker didn't win in 2003. it totally ushered in a new era of poker.

i'm not glorifying him btw, but years from now when we look back, i think it will be a watershed moment

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

I agree with you.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

The reason poker is so popular has more to do with ESPN and the pocket cam more than Moneymaker and Raymer.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
But if Ivey wins it will have its first real superstar, one that is telegenic, young, and a bona fide great all around poker player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Ivey is already married.

Nice try though.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how it can be the best thing for poker. Wouldn't it just prove that you have to be a top player to do well? I'm confused by his statement completely. I don't see any logic in it. Would Sammy Farha winning in 2003 have been better for poker than Moneymaker?

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be good for poker because Ivey has a ton of fans and people like watching him play and want to be like him. If he wins a lot of people will start playing to begin their own personal quest to be like him someday. The thought that hey this guy is a pro that is better than I will ever be is thinking on a level about 100x higher than any player new to the game.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well anyway... ROOT FOR IVEY!!!!! I promise its the best thing for poker if he wins... If Ivey wins, the ratings on the ESPN show will be so rediculous, you wont even have to be a winning player anymore to make a living playing poker..... so GO PHIL IVEY!!!!!!!!!!!

What are everyone's thoughts on this? Agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

Except for the fact that Ivey has zero charisma at the table. I've never spoken to him personally, so I can't speak to that. But to a normal, every day fan, he's not too exciting to watch.

Awesome player, though. Fun to watch if you are really into the actual poker being played.

Better for poker: Tiffany Williamson
 

A black woman winning the WSOP has to be best of all the rest for poker...IMHO

Re: Better for poker: Tiffany Williamson
 

[ QUOTE ]
A black woman winning the WSOP has to be best of all the rest for poker...IMHO

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Tiffany?

http://www.gutshot.com/wsop/wsop2005...E/tiffDay4.jpg

Time for a new espn feature table?
 

"CardPlayer.com has done the math, and Table 119, the one housing Farzad Bonyadi and Greg Raymer, is home to 15% of the chips in play. With 12 tables still in action, the average table should have about 8 1/3% of the chips in play. "

I wouldn't be surprised to see them make this table the espn table after the dinner break. Of course maybe mike the mouth with chips is just too good for them to make the change.

Ken

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

ESPN just showed the replay of last year around 18th-19th place where he calls all-in with a straight flush draw, whines like a sissy-girl to his fiancee about god-knows-what, hits the draw on the river, then taunts <I forget his name> about the hand.

I had forgotten what a tool he was.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
ESPN just showed the replay of last year around 18th-19th place where he calls all-in with a straight flush draw, whines like a sissy-girl to his fiancee about god-knows-what, hits the draw on the river, then taunts <I forget his name> about the hand.

I had forgotten what a tool he was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really. He whines, "I can't believe you put all your money in with AJo" (after hitting his ace on the flop), when he had all his in with 89h on a draw.

Then like two hands later, "I can't believe he put all his money in with JJ", when he had all his in AK.

Like double standards much, Josh?

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

LOL - hilarious.

That insufferable clown Arieh is still steaming after getting busted in last year's WSOP by Raymer.

A Raymer repeat would be good for poker. Arieh *not* winning is great for poker as well.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

Here's something that could be great for poker. Arieh and other blow hards shut their pie hole's, be nice and stop running off the new players )at all levels).

Another great player that comes off as an A-Hole...IMHO

Side note: I'm for Ivey right behind Raymer.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

I was playing 3/6 NL at Arieh's table on Bodog the other day and me and him were both yucking it up about his bottomless fish pit... some guy tried to snap off a bluff with Q high for all his chips, must be nice to get sponsored

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

People say that overall Arieh is a good guy, he just made himself look like an a** during the confrontation.

The latest website posting doesn't help his cause either.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]

Really. He whines, "I can't believe you put all your money in with AJo" (after hitting his ace on the flop), when he had all his in with 89h on a draw.

Then like two hands later, "I can't believe he put all his money in with JJ", when he had all his in AK.

Like double standards much, Josh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both hands Josh was pushing all-in, while his opponent is making a questionable call. If you don't see the difference start by reading the gap concept than read up on folding equity and go from their.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
Both hands Josh was pushing all-in, while his opponent is making a questionable call. If you don't see the difference start by reading the gap concept than read up on folding equity and go from their.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

Josh had Th9h

Harry Demetriou had AJo

Flop was Ax-Kh-Qh. Harry did not have a heart. Josh moved all-in. Harry called. Turn was a blank. River was a heart and Josh goes off. I just saw the episode last night and he said "You call me with that? We can gamble! You called me with...hoo boy!" and some other things similar. Harry said "you got lucky, plain and simple" and Josh starts going off again.

The call might be questionable but Josh standing over him and taunting him after sucking out is pretty f'n retarded.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Really. He whines, "I can't believe you put all your money in with AJo" (after hitting his ace on the flop), when he had all his in with 89h on a draw.

Then like two hands later, "I can't believe he put all his money in with JJ", when he had all his in AK.

Like double standards much, Josh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both hands Josh was pushing all-in, while his opponent is making a questionable call. If you don't see the difference start by reading the gap concept than read up on folding equity and go from their.

[/ QUOTE ]
I could have sworn that Josh called with the inside straight flush draw.... but if not, OK.

I'm well aware of the gap concept, thanks.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

Josh definately called the all in bet, but neither of them really played the hand that poorly after the flop.

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

Not that this really matters, but i think that Josh's poiny was that Demttriou decided to check/ re-raise all in when the board read

A Kh Qh

I believe that although josh went all in, his point was that
a) He had to call with his current pot odds and all the possible draws he could hit (this making harry's check-raise a mistake which forced Josh to go all in.
b) The fact that the hand was raised pre-flop and harry played it so aggresively when there were a wide variety of hands that could have dominated Demetrious hand. (AA-QQ, Ak, AQ, KQ, JT, that were all possible for Josh to have.
c) Harry probably tried to push a hand that Josh thought he could throw him off of, or garb the pot from (and rightfully so).

These are just my thoughts, and as you can see, i can agree with josh being suprised with demetrious play here (A check raise is a rather bold play, even when pl,aying against a loose opponent like Josh). Comments?

Re: From Josh Arieh\'s website
 

I wish I hadn't deleted it from my Tivo...


Regardless, Josh was an a-hole at least thrice in last year's ME, in the last three tables, just counting hands that were caught on camera and shown on ESPN.

He taunted Demetriou after catching his heart on the river, moaned and groaned about getting called with JJ vs AK, and then called Raymer a name after getting eliminated from the final table. Granted Raymer forgave him later.

Together with the ring game hearsay, I have to believe that in general, he's a douche.