how did tom mcevoy ever win the world series?

[crockpot]

mcevoy article

here's what this article is saying to me:

- it is correct to put your opponent on a big pair here, meaning you will fold on the flop unless you hit a set, or an open-end straight draw. even if you hit a set, your opponent may hit a bigger set.
- your pot odds are 3.5:1, implied odds are 6.17:1, and the odds of winning the hand and sticking around to see it are about 7.5:1. also, there is a ~2% chance that you will lose all your chips to a set-over-set or by flopping a straight draw and missing.
- nevertheless, you should call here.

i won't even get into conserving chips and avoiding close gambles in a tournament. card player really needs to either proofread some of these articles or hire some authors that properly consider a question before writing an entire article on it.

[chaos]

He won his entry via a satelite. And then he got lucky at the right times.

[Stew]

What, exactly is your problem with the article? He clearly states that the hand was played correctly by the "hero" with the sixes?

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
What, exactly is your problem with the article? He clearly states that the hand was played correctly by the "hero" with the sixes?


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you faulting his lack of a re-raise with sixes pre-flop?

[Goodie]

Crockpot,

Although I normally enjoy your responses to many questions posed about pot limit and no limit hold em and the forum should be thankful to have such a thoughtfull and frequent poster, I have always thought that your responses were a bit on the weak-tight side. This post confirms that.

To win tournaments, actually win them, not make the money, these are the types of gambles that absolutly HAVE to be taken. I wouldn't even mind if he had raised all in pre-flop with the sixes given the description of the player in question. But with the blinds so high in relation to the stacks, to not call an extra three thousand pre-flop would be a huge mistake in this type of tournament.

As for Tom McEvoy as a player, I can't comment completly on this since I have never played with him for any long period of time. From what I've seen, he seems pretty solid, albeit somewhat overly tight at times.

But as for his advice in this hand, it's seems to me to be dead on. Gambles such as this are imperative it you are going to make a run at the big money.

Peace

Goodie

[crockpot]

if mcevoy says "reraise all-in and hope he throws away his hand", fine. if he says "your opponent probably has overcards, so call here and let him bluff at the flop, but perhaps fold if it contains an ace or king", fine. what he is telling you to do, however, is assume your opponent has a better hand than you, and call even though you are not getting the odds to draw out. i can't understand the strategy behind that.

[crockpot]

i cannot see how calling this bet possibly improves your chances of winning a big prize, if you think that the raiser most likely has a big pair. if mcevoy didn't explicitly state that, then the merits of calling or reraising can be argued. but why bother making a read if you aren't going to adjust your play because of it?

[bigpooch]

Are we to expect Chris Moneymaker to submit any articles? :-)

[crockpot]

all joking aside, if moneymaker needs any money, he should really write a book. it might be as bad as hellmuth's, but with his fame and fan favorite stats, he would probably outsell phil's book.

[William]

[ QUOTE ]
He won his entry via a satelite. And then he got lucky at the right times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Moneymaker did? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]