GREG RAYMER= OVERATTED ON 2+2??

[Spladle Master]

[ QUOTE ]
in an earlier post someone had actually compared him to the likes of negreanu, everyone who wins anything gets lucky at some point....

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Which is why making a statement like, "Raymer was lucky... very very lucky" is just plain silly.

[ QUOTE ]
You have takin my post completely out of context...

[/ QUOTE ]

How?

[Mason Malmuth]

People who are able to think clearly and explain the proper techniques for expert poker play in a clear and concise manner usually play pretty well. From my personal experience I can think of one exception, but in general they have very good overall results.

MM

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a regular of the MTT forum and I have to say Greg Raymer seems to be an untouchable g-d on these boards. While I am appreciative that he frequently lends advice to the 2+2 boards sometimes I believe there is a certain degree of bias for Raymer and his style of play on 2+2. While watching the WSOP i marvelled at Raymer's fearless blunt style...and also his luck. I think Raymer played the WSOP the optimal way for someone who only wants to win a 2500 person tourney and could care less about placing. All this does/did not make Raymer a worlclass player...and quite frankly he isnt one. Both Williams and Arieh have exceeded Raymer in successes since the WSOP but threads keep popping up discrediting their play and belittling their ability.

Is their a bias in favor of Raymer on 2+2?? DISCUSS....



DISCUSS.............

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the first time in about a month that I've visited this forum. I am not shocked that it still sucks, but it seems to have hit a new low with your moronic post.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
People who are able to think clearly and explain the proper techniques for expert poker play in a clear and concise manner usually play pretty well. From my personal experience I can think of one exception, but in general they have very good overall results.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]


is this a stab at sklansky? hahah mason you are a funny guy! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[zaxx19]

DID YOU POST THAT SAME RESPONSE ON A HUGE THREAD DEVOTED TO 2 HANDS DAVID WILLIAMS PLAYED OVER HALF A YR AGO IN A TOURNEY WHERE IT IS GENERALLY ACCEPTED HE PLAYED WELL AND IN WHICH HE TOOK 2ND OUT OF 2500 PLAYERS&gt;&gt;?? IF YOU DIDNT PERHAPS THIS POST ISNT AS MORONIC AS IT FIRST APPEARS TO YOU THEN,

[silversurfer]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a regular of the MTT forum and I have to say Greg Raymer seems to be an untouchable g-d on these boards. While I am appreciative that he frequently lends advice to the 2+2 boards sometimes I believe there is a certain degree of bias for Raymer and his style of play on 2+2. While watching the WSOP i marvelled at Raymer's fearless blunt style...and also his luck. I think Raymer played the WSOP the optimal way for someone who only wants to win a 2500 person tourney and could care less about placing. All this does/did not make Raymer a worlclass player...and quite frankly he isnt one. Both Williams and Arieh have exceeded Raymer in successes since the WSOP but threads keep popping up discrediting their play and belittling their ability.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think some of what you said was true. Greg isn't a legend - yet. People are biased towards his comments; but as he has generously offered sound advice for quite some time now and backed this up with wins/solid finishes in several large tournaments, I don't see why people shouldn't be. Is he Doyle Brunson? No. Is his advice sound and worth listening to? Without question.

For the record, I'm not really interested in defending Greg; he can do that himself, and has. My problem is that you are a shameless troll. You post frequently on the MTT forum? No, you post obsessively on that forum, and half of it is incendiary drivel like this, littered with dude-speak, shouting matches, and enough grammatical and syntax errors to slay a horde of english teachers. For every intelligent thing you say, there are at LEAST 20 posts that make my eyes bleed.

But I digress. I do have a point. You seem surprised that everyone is up in arms with your post, when in reality, it is nothing more than a poorly-disgused attack on Greg as retribution for the attacks on your heroes Josh and David. I could dissect it line by line to show you all the snide comments not-so-cleverly hidden in it, but you know this already, don't you?

You have stated numerous times in other posts that you don't think Greg's play and results are up to par with the greats, and this is just another ham-handed, mean-spirited attack designed to jack up your post count. Otherwise, why not simply ask: "Is there a bias towards Raymer on this forum?" No, one only needs look at the subject line: OVERATTED ON 2 + 2?!?!?! Not an attack, huh? Here is one, and I'll admit to it, unlike you: learn how to spell, you half-wit.

Let me summarize (in your language): WE KNOWZ YOU HATE RAYMAR D00D OkAY? L337!!11. We've seen enough posts on this, thanks. I really wish you and Desidia would go away. Sadly, this is a free country, and I guess we have to hear 800 posts a month from you. Maybe someday you'll learn quantity /= quality. Maybe someday you'll type in the english language. Maybe you'll have your oft-dreamt of three-way with David Williams and Josh Arieh. Having lived out your greatest fantasy, you calm down and quit subjecting us to your attacks on Greg(if not posting altogether). Somehow, I don't see any of these things happening.

Sorry for feeding the trolls, couldn't resist.

[razor]

blah blah blah blah blah blah

are you still yapping???!?!?

where's that damn Ignore User option... ah, here it is...

see ya Zaxx19

[Greg (FossilMan)]

the pullback. Similarly, I shouldn't have denigrated to insults. It was a no-win situation for me, and likewise for you. Sometimes though, you just can't help yourself.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[zaxx19]

When in doubt insult grammar(lol do you guys think I proofread posts to an online board lol), criticize poster for some "veiled" agenda without being specific, and whatever you do do not address the actual content of said message. You guys constantly are saying you cant take me seriously bc of grammar or syntax. I cant really take half of you guys seriously based on content, lets never forget which one is more important.

[cjromero]

I nominate this for post of the year. I can't think of a more reasoned, well thought out response.