I am getting sick of my friends saying "Raymer just got lucky."

[Greg (FossilMan)]

or something? While it's true you've never said anything nasty or blatantly wrong about me, you sure give the impression that you'd love nothing more than to make everyone believe I'm a chump who just got lucky for a week, and who is likely never going to do anything much ever again.

While it is completely true that one cannot correctly say I'm a good player based upon the WSOP this year, every time somebody brings up another form of evidence, you put it down. They say I'm a respected player at Foxwoods, in cash games and tournaments, and you discuss why that's meaningless. They say I'm respected here on 2+2 for consistently giving good tournament advice, and you put that down, saying it only proves I can talk the talk, but not walk the walk. Apparently, the only evidence you'll accept is for me to go out and win a bunch of other big events. Of course, if I fail to do so in the next year or two, that doesn't prove I'm a flash anymore than winning this year's main event proves I'm not just a flash.

You or somebody pulled my record from the Hendon Mob website in another thread. Somebody said it looked pretty weak. I guess they don't understand much about the subject. I have historically entered 1-4 events in the WSOP for the past 4 years, about 4-7 events at the World Poker Finals at Foxwoods, and about 2-4 events at the New England Poker Classic. There have been very few other events I've entered that would be reported in this database, maybe another half-dozen total. So, in the last 4 years, I've played in maybe 60-80 reported tournaments. I've won 2, and made another handful of final tables. Since the average field in these events (discounting the 2576 in this year's WSOP) was well over 100, I'd say that's pretty good. It doesn't prove I'm world class, but, I'm not sure any record could prove that point, unless it was so extreme that there was no alternative explanation left.

You kept comparing me to pros, who are less well known (now), but who have better records. Well, that's not a reasonable comparison. They were playing up to double the number of events per year that I played in 4 years. I would hope that they won a lot more often, and made a lot more final tables. If they didn't, I doubt you would have 4 years of records of their results to report. ;-)

Anyway, I really don't care if I "prove" myself to you or anybody. However, I would love to know why you are on what appears to be a vendetta against me on this issue.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[ohkanada]

Its the glasses Greg. Some people just can't handle the glasses!

Ken

[Go Blue]

It's not that Raymer isn't good, but it's also not that he didn't just get lucky. It's a combination of both, although I like to think that in his case, it was definitely more luck. He'd get all his chips in with hands like KQ and AJ without a second though. It worked for him in the WSOP, due to winning the coin flips. But did you watch the TOC? He didn't win his coin flip with KQ against a lower pocket and with I think 9T against 88. Bam, he was out. The same thing could have happened in the WSOP, but didn't. In the TOC, in my opinion, he was exposed as a truly inexperirnced player.

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
Its the glasses Greg. Some people just can't handle the glases!

[/ QUOTE ]

It's definitely the glasses. Heck, some people can only spell 'glasses' correctly about half the time! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Later,
Che

[BeerMoney]

You won 5 million dollars. You're a successful patent attorney. You have 99% of the support from people on here. So one person thinks you're a luckbox, despite the fact that other people were willing to put money on you becuase they knew it had +EV. This guys a chump, forget about him/her and move on.

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not that Raymer isn't good, but it's also not that he didn't just get lucky. It's a combination of both, although I like to think that in his case, it was definitely more luck. He'd get all his chips in with hands like KQ and AJ without a second though. It worked for him in the WSOP, due to winning the coin flips. But did you watch the TOC? He didn't win his coin flip with KQ against a lower pocket and with I think 9T against 88. Bam, he was out. The same thing could have happened in the WSOP, but didn't. In the TOC, in my opinion, he was exposed as a truly inexperirnced player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you just start playing poker last week? If you can't figure out when he was in the coin flips he was in, then you don't understand poker.

I'll take a coin flip with KQ when I have 2 Million and my opponent has 150,000 all the time.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Many Moneymaker backers were sick of everyone here saying 'MM just got lucky.' Thats just the way things are...sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moneymaker did get lucky, no matter how much his backers don't like it getting said.

[/ QUOTE ]

As did Raymer...in fact anyone who wins a tourney with over 1000 people gets lucky.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
No one is going to consistently win 2000 player tournaments, or "reach final tables over and over again." Those who are looking to denigrate a particular player's skill will always have a long list of tournament failures to point to.

Greg was one of the most respected tournament players at Foxwoods for some time before he won the WSOP. Did he consistently crush the game and make the final table week after week? Of course not, no one in the world is that good.

What's really disturbing is that people can look at Raymer side by side with the last 2 WSOP champs and think that they all just got lucky, without understanding the fundamental differences in the way they played. At the end of the day, the champ still has to win a lot of coinflips, but you have to look at how he got there. Did he make a strong bet with a lot of folding equity, and won the coinflip after the opponent called anyway? Or did he call an all-in with QTo and win a coinflip?

There will always be people who don't understand the difference between these situations and claim "it all looks like luck to me." Those are the people who just don't get it, and thank god they exist, because this game would be pretty hard to beat if everyone understood it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you say this to demean MM? Do you remember MM at the final table? He lured Jason Lester to bet all in with a dominanted hand, then he put 'the bluff of the century' on Farha. Both of them had some luck, but you seem to be totally playing up Greg's skillful plays, while ignoring MM.

When you say:

"What's really disturbing is that people can look at Raymer side by side with the last 2 WSOP champs and think that they all just got lucky, without understanding the fundamental differences in the way they played."

you seem to be implying that while Greg got lucky he also played great, but that MM did not also do the same. I disagree with that.

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Many Moneymaker backers were sick of everyone here saying 'MM just got lucky.' Thats just the way things are...sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moneymaker did get lucky, no matter how much his backers don't like it getting said.

[/ QUOTE ]

As did Raymer...in fact anyone who wins a tourney with over 1000 people gets lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is true on many levels. When you get AA, it's not skill that puts you up against someone with KK, it's luck. It's also luck that you get AA in the BB and you win in a walk.

Everyone has some luck, but to win a tournament that big you need luck + skill.

[Ionphore]

[ QUOTE ]
One of them even went so far to say that if Raymer played in our home game, he would have a shot at beating him. Pfft! My friend wouldn't have a prayer!


[/ QUOTE ]

Your friend would have a shot. It's not like playing a game of chess or 1 on 1 in basketball. Why doesen't anyone in this thread get it? Your friend could easily have the right cards against Greg. That doesen't mean anything. Playing a winning game of poker consists of loosing pots. Especially in tournaments. I don't understand why people equate winning a pot against someone as being better then them. Or winning 20 pots against them. Or beating them in a final table. Thats not where poker is won or lost. The micro results matter so very little. Just whether you made the correct play.

On a side note. Is Desdia your friend Karak?