GREG RAYMER= OVERATTED ON 2+2??

[Biff M.]

He is also a world class person. Pretty much apologizing to every player he busted (underdog or not) in the WSOP 2004, and generally being a nice guy.

[arabie]

"The WSOP is not any of those tournaments, and trying to compare them is like apples and oranges. Winning one 2,500 person online tournament is simply not the same thing. It's much easier to win the online tournament."

Doesn't the fact that the blinds go up so fast in an online tournament decrease the level of skill in the skill-luck balance? Also the blinds are huge relative to the avg. chip sizes... i'm pretty sure this isn't the same in wsop. Anyways, the wsop still may be tougher... but just something else to the think about.

[maryfield48]

Is it too late to get in on this?

[ QUOTE ]
So, I've decided to see if there is enough interest in backing me to go this route. What I propose to do is solicit investments in units of $500., with the goal of raising $40-50,000. Of this amount, I would contribute $10,000, and the other investors would provide the remaining 30-40K. I would then use this bankroll to stake my poker play for the remainder of 2002. I would use this money for gambling at poker, but not for any other form of gambling, and I would use it at my best discretion within the realm of poker. At a minimum, I expect to use the bankroll to participate in 6-10 events at the World Poker Finals, to play almost every Tuesday in the Foxwoods NL HE tourney, and to play 1-2 times per week in the 50-100 HOE game at Mohegan Sun. Assuming the bankroll is still healthy, I would also expect to participate in 4 or more events at the U.S. Poker Championships in Atlantic City.

[snip]

If you seriously wish to make an investment, please contact me by email. If enough people want to do this, I will contact all of you with information about sending me your investment money, and we will begin the playing period. Please also feel free to email me with your questions, which I will gladly answer.

This being posted in a public forum, I am sure there will be many sarcastic comments and the like. I can't stop you from making them, but I can and will ignore them. If you don't like this investment, then don't make it. It's that simple.

Thanks for taking the time to read all this.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess so. But it's worth checking out the thread from whence it was taken, if only for Ray Zee's post in which he gives his assessment of the investment being offered. Fossilman might not be a god, but I figure around here Ray Zee is the closest thing to it, so his blessing ought to be at least persuasive. This was 18 months before the 2004 WSOP, and shows that Fossilman had long ago convinced a pretty good poker mind about his ability.

[Nottom]

I hate repsonding to threads that are already 8 pages long but ...

[ QUOTE ]
yet, none of this supports why he is so overrated on these boards and does not have the track record to back it up. if this were a discussion on outstanding poker knowledge, then it's no wonder why folks on 2+2 are camping out overnight to purchase a book of tourney ESSAYS (not wins and final table appearances) from this guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main reason people here love greg is because we all thought he was a great player before winning the WSOP. I would expect the same sort of reaction if El Diablo, Clarkmeister, or some other respected poster were to win a big televised event. Everyone would basically jump up and down and say ... see I told you that guy knew his sh!t.

[wray]

I've never seen a person try so hard to make everyone feel good about themselves after they got beat.

He had something nice to say about everyone. When it came to someone he appeared to dispise (Mike the mouth) he only said something to the effect of " he was going broke no matter what"

[sdplayerb]

Long before Greg played in this years WSOP I stated I learned more by discussing hands with him here than anything else I had done.
I wouldn't be the winning player I am today if not for Greg.
His helped here ahs probably made others here well over $100K (i'd bet a lot more).

Couldn't happen to a more worthy nor better guy.

Randy

[dr_zorba]

[ QUOTE ]

Oh and what is a Palestinian?? lol I just cant keep up with these contrived Islamo-nationalities...always a new one every year hard to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are a stateless people, oppressed and confined in an open-air concentration camp by the world's 3rd strongest armed forces.
BTW - They are decidedly NOT "Islamo's," whatever that is. As a matter of fact, 15% of all Palestinians are Christians. Stay informed, and try to be loving to those who are suffering.

Link: http://www.leftbehind.com/channelfre...;channelID=185

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the fact that the blinds go up so fast in an online tournament decrease the level of skill in the skill-luck balance? Also the blinds are huge relative to the avg. chip sizes... i'm pretty sure this isn't the same in wsop. Anyways, the wsop still may be tougher... but just something else to the think about.

[/ QUOTE ]


a 2500 player tournament online would likely take 8-10 hours I am guessing.
Live it takes around 6 days (of maybe 10-12 hours each perhaps??).
Because of how much more quickly the game moves online the difference is not as great as you might think. you do get more play in the live tourney....but not as much as you probably are imagining.

Also...most online tournaments do not feature virtually every single world-class player and former world-champion.
If your 2500 player online tourney included the likes of Ivey, Lederer, Brunson, Harrington, Luske, Paul Phillips, Chan, Seidel, Hansen, Ferguson, etc etc etc THEN you could more realistically compare it to the WSOP main-event.


I won a 4k player freeroll once....and I wouldn't even DREAM of comparing the achievement to winning a 4k tournament with better players.
I also have won an online $110 buy-in tourney with 400 players to win $12.5k. and I wouldn't dream of equating this achievement with winning the 2000 or 2001 WSOP (which I am guessing had roughly the same number of players) or any other $10k buy-in event with 400 players.

It just isn't the same.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the fact that the blinds go up so fast in an online tournament decrease the level of skill in the skill-luck balance? Also the blinds are huge relative to the avg. chip sizes... i'm pretty sure this isn't the same in wsop. Anyways, the wsop still may be tougher... but just something else to the think about.

[/ QUOTE ]


a 2500 player tournament online would likely take 8-10 hours I am guessing.
Live it takes around 6 days (of maybe 10-12 hours each perhaps??).
Because of how much more quickly the game moves online the difference is not as great as you might think. you do get more play in the live tourney....but not as much as you probably are imagining.

Also...most online tournaments do not feature virtually every single world-class player and former world-champion.
If your 2500 player online tourney included the likes of Ivey, Lederer, Brunson, Harrington, Luske, Paul Phillips, Chan, Seidel, Hansen, Ferguson, etc etc etc THEN you could more realistically compare it to the WSOP main-event.


I won a 4k player freeroll once....and I wouldn't even DREAM of comparing the achievement to winning a 4k tournament with better players.
I also have won an online $110 buy-in tourney with 400 players to win $12.5k. and I wouldn't dream of equating this achievement with winning the 2000 or 2001 WSOP (which I am guessing had roughly the same number of players) or any other $10k buy-in event with 400 players.

It just isn't the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

you make some relevant points; however, even in the mention of all those world class players playing in the WSOP Championship, Raymer did'nt have play against all of them at the same table during the whole tournament. i doubt that that Raymer played against a large number of good players throughout the whole tournament at every table he sat. from what i've read so far on people's opinion's of his play-- even as a part-time player-- he should've been one of the best players at every table he played. for a superior player, i don't think that it's such a hard task to outplay the opposition whether over 8 to 10 hours or 8 to 10 days. i liken it to an extended version of a 1-table SNG. you're not beating out 2500 players, only the ones that's involved in your table.

[sfwusc]

I agree, can we delete it?

I know that Greg would kick my ass in a tourny or limit game. If they are better than me, then get them to post. If they are worse than me---dont let them read the posts [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

I need to play worse players not better players. That said......Greg if I ever run into you playing. I might sit down for an orbit(what limit do you play at now?). You seem like a nice guy. Dont let these idiots mess with your head.

SFWUSC