Laak-Chan Final
 

Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

No, don't you understand? When you have such a great tournament record you're allowed to do [censored] like that.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Are you being sarcastic? Because, that's not half bad. I mean, there's a lot better out there, but hell, I'll take that record in a heartbeat.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

what did he do?

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only all the time.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
No, don't you understand? When you have such a great tournament record you're allowed to do [censored] like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's actually surprising... I don't really love the guy, but I don't really hate him either. Yeah he acts sometimes, but that atracts fishes to the game (and he was kinda funny at first).

Has he really only been at 2 WPT final tables? It seems he's on their every other time I decide to watch it.


P.S. Of course I'd take his record, he's actually won money!

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there was an enormous difference in Laak when the game moved to the primary TV table form the outer table.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Did 27th place in the WPT tournament actually pay less than the event's buy in?

[ QUOTE ]
23-May-05 United States $ 10,000 WPT No Limit Hold'em Championship
2005 Mirage Poker Showdown, Las Vegas 27th $ 9,148

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

not too unusual.


On the PPM cruise ($10k buy-in) I finished 177th out of 735 and won $5200.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
not too unusual.


On the PPM cruise ($10k buy-in) I finished 177th out of 735 and won $5200.

[/ QUOTE ]

hm, is this a good thing or bad thing. I mean it's good for the satellite winners that didn't have to pay the upfront cost, but it's bad for the people that pay the upfront cost and looking for top heavy prizes.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

yes. obviously it's true.

For the PPM cruise, almost 90% of the entrants were online-satellite winners (they had the break-down posted).
This is probably how they justify the REALLY flat pay-out structure. It makes more people happy...and they can still hang onto enough money to make the top prizes impressive.

1st was $1.5-mil, 2nd was $1-mil.
55th through 145th all won $10.4k
146th through 180th all won $5.2k

It was a REALLY weird pay-out structure of course.

But there were LOTS of cruise-goers who were REALLY happy to win $5k or $10k (on top of the already REALLY nice cruise they got).
For a tourney like that I think it's a good marketing strategy.

but obviously lots of top players probably don't dig it so much.


UB Aruba was very much the same last year (don't know what it is this year).
EXTREMELY flat pay-out structure.
I think Daryn finished 13th or so out of about 200 and only won $13k (this was a $5k entry I believe).


To my knowledge, I think the WSOP main-event pretty much paid-out the entry-fee (or about that) once you made the money.
this year I think that making the money meant that you won $15k (which is a change from the $10k or so that it might normally have been).

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

To be honest, I like this payout. Especially in big events sponsered by online sites

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there was an enormous difference in Laak when the game moved to the primary TV table form the outer table.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously you weren't there. he acts like that all the time.

i don't know what everyone's deal with him is. he's goofy as hell, great guy. if he bugs you then he's doing his job.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

I watched him at a ring game live at Bellagio. He wasn't doing pushups or that silly watch the cards come out thing, but he was way hyper and unpredictable.

I think he's pretty funny. He actually made Chan laugh at that final table, no small feat.

He's either overcaffeinated, oversped up, or he's the one kid that didn't get Ritalin when he should have, cuz he's got a ridiculous amount of energy.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

I'd be hyper too if I was tapping Jennifer Tilly

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Yes, he is a tool. His act was funny for about a minute. He is the mascot of the WPT. Like the Phillie Phanatic.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd be hyper too if I was tapping Jennifer Tilly

[/ QUOTE ]

Ten years ago I'd be hyper. Now I'd be ripping my eyes out.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

yeah, but she's probably still "LAG"

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?


[/ QUOTE ]

This guy is so friggin annoying to watch. It's like the Phil Laak show. I wanted the event to be over quickly just so I wouldnt have to watch his antics anymore...he's not even remotely funny..ok maybe one or two of his one-liners are worth a chuckle but overall I just want to kick his ass ..and that interview --haha-He's easily one of the my least favorite players to watch -just dont dig his schtick-takes away from the game. I dont care how brilliant or great a player he is -his tv persona makes me want kick his head permanently into that jumpsuit of his.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, but she's probably still "LAG"

[/ QUOTE ]

I like my women weak-tight.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
No, don't you understand? When you have such a great tournament record you're allowed to do [censored] like that.


[/ QUOTE ]

that dont mean dick
Looking at a players results just based on wins is foolhardy. He's won ~$400 K gross over the last what looks like 3 fulltime years playing big tournies(WPT,WSOP) seriously. Not sure on any details but its the concept involved here..If he plays just 10 big buy-in events $10K a year he is stuck $100K a year without a win. Three years worth of expenses just for buy-ins not even including the expenses of staying on the circuit-hotels,food travel etc probably cost him $100K -$200K a year depending on how many events he plays.

If you assume his net expenses for the circuit in 3 years are at a minimum $300K his $398K earnings are a net $98K win overall for 3 years of work-that sucks asss.

If he doesnt play all major bigbuy-in events and he plays more cash games thats another issue. I'm not privy to his mix of games but looking at a player gross tourney winnings over a time period dont mean dick until you know the players outlays over that time period.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

www.m-w.com

Type "sarcasm."

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

I thought he came across as trying way too hard to be funny and fell flat on his face.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]

I like my women weak-tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like my women like I like my poker: tight and aggressive.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

It happens sometimes. The majority of tournaments pay out more than the buy-in to even the smallest winner, but some don't. PPM is the best/worst at this. For while in the late 80s and early 90s (right around the time the million-dollar guarentee came out) the WSOP ME did this too, but now everyone in the money gets $10K+ (about $12.5K this year).

I think the first WPT Championship was the same way.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is Phil Laak usually such a tool?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've come to believe that he has no choice but to ALWAYS act like a tool. If he got serious at getting-serious time, he'd have nowhere to hide.

And yes, he is a tool. From acting like an ass on WPT last year when he did the super-suckout and peeking over the dealers shoulder, to down-talking all the kids on that home poker show, to again looking over the dealers shoulder at the turn and river.

And if his girl Jennifer can't clap for Johnny f*cking Chan as he goes for his 10th bracelet, she can kiss my ass too. What a who-wa.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Phil Laak is madly in love with his own quasi-celebrity even more than his quasi-celebrity girlfriend. He acts like a fool when he is on television. Nothing about his play strikes me as extraordinary. What a tool.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

I don't get where all this animosity is coming from. Maybe I missed something, but all I saw was a goofy guy that was having a little good-natured fun at the poker table. What's wrong with that? It's not like he's berating opponents, whining about bad beats, or just generally taking himself too seriously like so many other "tools" you see on these shows. It's just a game after all, being played by a bunch of guys that have already won a lot of money just by making the final table. Are they all supposed to just sit there silent and stone-faced? Sure, he's a little over the top with his antics, but he's not hurting anyone and it can be sort of funny at times. Some of you guys just take things way too seriously. Johnny Chan managed to get a few laughs out of it, you should too.

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Played 10-25 NL with Laak for about an hour during the wpt borgata last week. He was pretty calm and somewhat quiet, though he did have his shoes off, and about 30 seconds after I sat down he whispered to me, "Dude... I won't tell anyone... but are you actually 21?"

Otherwise he didn't make much of a spectacle of himself, and seemed to play half-decent (didn't get much of a read on him, he stayed out of any real decision pots while I was there).

2nd

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

Who is that in your avatar

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

for aruba it was 6k buyin tourney, i finish 29th out of 700 or so, and get $10,000.

to put this in perspective, the 200th place finisher received $7,000

Re: Laak-Chan Final
 

[ QUOTE ]
for aruba it was 6k buyin tourney, i finish 29th out of 700 or so, and get $10,000.

to put this in perspective, the 200th place finisher received $7,000

[/ QUOTE ]

Does your ass still hurt from that?