|
|
|
|
#1
12-22-2004, 12:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
|
|
#3
12-22-2004, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
[ QUOTE ]
This is bad news for us. Now the WPT watching fish will find out about Sklansky. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I agree. Best thing that could've happened for all of us would be for Phil to win, and subsequently come out with another book. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#4
12-22-2004, 12:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
Sklansky post-game interview: "thanks Shana, I would like to take this opportunity NOT to thank god. Also, this proves that poker is all math. I would also like to say thank you to DonkeyKong on twoplustwo.com for all his help with helping to understand the game. You know Shana, you are hot."....
|
|
#5
12-22-2004, 12:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
I bet is wasn't even close!
|
|
#8
12-22-2004, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
I always thought David was great. When I heard about this win a few weeks ago via the WPDG meeting, I wasn't surprised.
What so many recreational players and/or cash game players don't realize is the unbelievable luck factor in a single tourney. I guess I didn't even want to believe it myself, until I got into the circuit earlier this year. I started getting feedback after just a couple of big events, e-mail laced with "you must not be any good, you didn't win anything yet" type ramblings. While I won't debate rather I am "any good" or not, lol, I do know that individual tourneys have an amazing luck factor, as David and other top players have pointed out here time and again. So David hasn't won a bracelet in a long time, so what? Why should this surprise anyone? He is a cash game player who rarely plays tourneys. Why is it that someone who plays 300+ major tournaments per year, and wins a couple is considered a "top player," while someone who plays <10 major tourneys per year is considered a "has been" who obviously doesn't have "it" anymore, if he ever had it to begin with. For those who think certain players don't know how to play poker, they are wrong. But I want them to keep thinking along this vein, so that maybe one day I can win [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Felicia [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#9
12-22-2004, 05:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
[ QUOTE ]
. Why is it that someone who plays 300+ major tournaments per year, and wins a couple is considered a "top player," while someone who plays <10 major tourneys per year is considered a "has been" who obviously doesn't have "it" anymore, if he ever had it to begin with. Felicia [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I don't know what you consider "Major" but no way anybody can play in 300 of them in a year. Most Majors take 2 to 5 days some even more to complete.. 365 days.. Hmm ain't possible.
|
|
#10
12-22-2004, 05:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sklansky Wins WPT Event!
I didn't think it was possible, either. But I just read where someone claimed that he is playing 300+ events per year. Jett, Negreanu? I can't remember who said it, don't quote me (I think they are both great players, btw).
I guess I would consider $500+ events to be considered "major," but that is just relying on the cutoff that someone else gave me earlier this year. I know I couldn't do it. I just started playing in the so-called "major" events this April. I've only played in about 10 so far, and I'm already exhausted, lol. Felicia [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
