#1
|
|||
|
|||
4 definite pros at final table
Kanter ------- probably amateur
Barch -------- probably pro Black -------- definitely pro Matusow ---- definitely pro Danneman --- definitely amateur Hachem ----- definitely pro Bergsdorf ---- definitely pro Lazar -------- not sure Kondracki ---- definitely amateur |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
Nice math.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
Nice math. [/ QUOTE ] LOL. At least he learned from his "definate" mistake. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
What is the criteria being used for being a "pro" here? That they have played in some big events before? That they make a living playing poker? Seems like there is a big difference between these categories.
I mean, Andy Black has been in a Bhuddist Monestary for the last 3 years. Was he hustling the monks in there? Anyone have confirmation on this? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
What is the criteria being used for being a "pro" here? [/ QUOTE ] Someone who makes a living playing poker. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
Nice math. [/ QUOTE ] What's wrong with the math? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What is the criteria being used for being a "pro" here? [/ QUOTE ] Someone who makes a living playing poker. [/ QUOTE ] I wonder if you could provide some sources then because what I have read about the players does not correlate with your results. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if you could provide some sources then because what I have read about the players does not correlate with your results. [/ QUOTE ] I put this up for discussion. If you disagree with specific entries, please indicate that. I am pretty sure that Matasow, Bergdorf, and Hacham are pros. Bergsdorf lists himself as a pro for 3 years in Cardplayer. Hacham is one of the top players in Australia. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
Matusow is clearly an amateur.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 4 definite pros at final table
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What is the criteria being used for being a "pro" here? [/ QUOTE ] Someone who makes a living playing poker. [/ QUOTE ] I wonder if you could provide some sources then because what I have read about the players does not correlate with your results. [/ QUOTE ] typical internet etiquette (heh) requires that if you're gonna call someone out on posting BS, you are the one that is meant to provide a source contradicting what they've said. |
|
|