Jackpot Jay: HOH fan!

[meow_meow]

I loved the part where he says that he does better in satellites and live STTs than in live cash or "real" tournements, and then most of the reasons he lists as to why have to do with reducing the advantage that better players have over him (e.g. faster blind structures).

At least he knows he sucks.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ, this guy is a [censored] idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

But those crazy internet players could have anything!!!! They are impossible to put on hands! He needs to consider moving up in limits where players are more predictable and they respect raises more.

[Frills]

He makes me want to open an account at Captain Cooks

[dlk9s]

[ QUOTE ]

I agree there's some garbage out there and people who are paid to write just because of who they are (John Kruk and Phil Hellmuth come to mind). But Jackpot Jay has to be the worst.


[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair to Kruk, he's a baseball player, not a writer. He does a good job in his Baseball Tonight analyst role - much better than when he had to basically be the butt of a fat joke on The Best Damn Sports Show Period.

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I agree there's some garbage out there and people who are paid to write just because of who they are (John Kruk and Phil Hellmuth come to mind). But Jackpot Jay has to be the worst.


[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair to Kruk, he's a baseball player, not a writer. He does a good job in his Baseball Tonight analyst role - much better than when he had to basically be the butt of a fat joke on The Best Damn Sports Show Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my point. Kruk is a baseball player, not a write. Hellmuth is a poker player, not a writer. Jackpot Jay is...well I don't know, but he sure as hell ain't a writer!

[Easy E]

By inference, anyway. My favorite part of his latest article:

<font color="blue">"This, by the way, is one of the reasons vastly superior players like Phil Ivey, Daniel Negreanu, Howard Lederer, et. al., will probably never win a WSOP main event. They can be 100 times better than the average Internet player – 200 times better! – which simply means that they are 100-1 or 200-1 favorites over any particular individual Internet amateur who manages to get into the main event. Nonetheless, invariably, the sheer volume of reckless competitors will be enough to eliminate them, somewhere along the way.


<font color="green">What can you do about it? For once – perhaps the only time – just what the pros will be doing: Don't chase, don't bluff, don't get fancy, on the rare occasions you get the nuts, bet them in a straightforward fashion, don't assume anything, and unless absolutely necessary, avoid all-in confrontations with well-stacked, unpredictable, unreadable foes for as long as you can. Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.</font></font>

So, to paraphrase Jay's conclusions: the best pros will probably never win, only reckless/clueless Internet players can win the WSOP main event now..... and let me go on to recommend that you follow the strategy that the pros are going to use... the ones that can't win anyway.

Oh yeah, I'll stop playing until the WSOP because I can't play without losing and that gets me in the mode of being a loser... plus it would be embarrassing to go throughout the year on my Holy Grail quest and end up losing money, once I dump another ten grand in June. So, I'll just stop now when I can guarantee that I'm "ahead" for the run.
(then again, since I didn't keep records that tell me how I'm doing in different games and tournaments, how do I even know where I'm at for ytd cash?)

Did I miss anything else?

Hey, Fossilman, don't you feel like a total fake now, taking that money last year from better players? I think you should return your share to the prize pool, you incompetent Internet wanna-be pro... Personally, I'd be embarassed to call myself a poker player if I were you. Good thing you didn't turn pro until after you lucked into your WSOP win

[LinusKS]

You people are relentless. However, JJ's main point - that the amount of chance involved in the WSOP is so high that no individual player - no matter how "good" he is - is likely to win it - has been made many times before, including by writers whose books y'all revere.

[InkyWretch]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm a big fan of good sports writing. I think Bill Simmons (also on ESPN Page 2) is incredible.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you be a fan of good sports writing and think Simmons is incredible? He's nothing but a fanboy blogger who relies on crutches (running diaries of events, pop culture references, catchphrases) rather than solid writing and reporting and insight.

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm a big fan of good sports writing. I think Bill Simmons (also on ESPN Page 2) is incredible.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you be a fan of good sports writing and think Simmons is incredible? He's nothing but a fanboy blogger who relies on crutches (running diaries of events, pop culture references, catchphrases) rather than solid writing and reporting and insight.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're basing this opinion on, what, all 2 of his articles you've read? If you think he's a "fanboy blogger" then you obviously haven't read many of his articles.

[Blackjack]

I think he likes the pretty colors on the front of the HOH book.