A Response to Hellmuth and Matusow

[oaktoon]

Phil amd Mike-- ever willing to use their vocal cords-- each basically attacked amateur players at the WSOP yesterday for their willingness to b et coin flips and push excessively. They each argue that one of the beauties of NLHE is the post-flop action and that is being lost in the WPT/TV in general influenced penchant for the all-in bet.

Let me first state that I see a lot of value in their arguments and they each have-- to use Matusow's own words when he was a chip leader yesterday-- earned some credibility as protectors of their sport/craft.

But I respectfully disagree from this standpoint: to play that way may be the amateur's best chance and he/she/we know it.

By way of introduction, I've been playing in live events for 6 months (40 or so by now) and another 6 before that on the internet. Never before at such a venue as the WSOP. But I'm a halfway decent player-- made level 5 in Event Two-- played in two supersatellites the last two days and made the final table in one-- I was the "bubble"-- and the 2nd to last table in the other. I'm not a fool. And my appreciation for the game grows daily.

But aside from the fact that Phil and Mike now owe a fair amount of their livelihoods to all of us amateurs-- (if pro golfers could once say they credited Arnold palmer for a quarter of every dollar they earned, and Tiger Woods now probably twice that, I'd say the top poker pros owe .75 of each dollar to Moneymaker, Raymer, ESPN and the lipstick camera which brought all of us to poker)-- I would think one can defend the amateurs' play.

I know that in extended combat with any of the top pros, I'm going to get beat. But if I have a draw like the guy who crippled hellmuth yesterday (and Phil, you have no right to complain since if the guy put you on the most likely hand-- AJ-- he not only had the 7 outs on the straight draw, the 7 additional outs for the flush, but he also likely had 6 more outs from his K-Q overcards (he didn't of course since Phil had two pair)-- how could anyone not have called with a chance to double up with 20 outs twice???), I'm gonna take it.

And that would apply to another key juncture or two in the tournament. We aren't as good, so at some point we-- like Columbus-- have to take a chance. In my case I was crippled by the last hand before Level Four. I had 5000 chips and was UTG. I told myself don't play the hand, but then I looked at Big Slick. Limped-- no raise until the SB who pushed with about 3000 chips. I thought "he probably has JJ or QQ, but it could be a lesser ace"-- so i gambled. Hit a K on the flop, but with the Q on the flop came a 9 and 10 on the turn and river to fill out his straight. Maybe I should have been more careful, but as a pretty good amateur as opposed to a great pro, I figured I had a decent shot at getting a nice stack, so I took it.

I don't believe we're ruining poker, though again I can see the validity of Phil/Mike's complaints. It is what it is-- the world changed two years ago, and it's never going back.