|
|
#41
09-30-2004, 10:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Paul, it\'s statements like the one this guy made...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] As for luck, how about Johnny Chan's 11 coin flips in a row in the ME? Surely Chan is a great player. [/ QUOTE ] Is this oft-repeated legend (which I've heard with every number from 8 to 20 in it) actually documented anywhere reliable? Not that it's all that far-fetched, but I don't think it belongs in the realm of "known fact". [ QUOTE ] Or Sammy Farha last year, calling all in against quads early in the tourney and hitting his SF. [/ QUOTE ] That's how legends get started I guess. The money went in after he hit the straight flush, not before. [/ QUOTE ] which fuel my posts. another guy said that Greg was leading the tournament for days, when he actually started leading when the players were well into the money down to 32 players. granted, leading when it counts is a good thing, don't get me wrong, but simply giving credit where it's not due is going above and beyond. 
|
|
#42
09-30-2004, 10:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Paul, it\'s statements like the one this guy made...
"don't get me wrong, but simply giving credit where it's not due is going above and beyond."
Are you being a bit picky? Yeah technically he wasn't leading from day 1. He was 4th after day 1 in the top 10 or so each day. I think one day he dropped out of the top 10. Ken
|
|
#43
09-30-2004, 10:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
another thing Greg, if i\'ve never...
said anything nasty or blatantly wrong about you, why would you ask if i have a vendetta against you? why would you think that i'm trying to make you out to look like a chump?
everything i say about you has merit and sparks discussion. i'm a born lobbyist. it would seem to me that someone with a vendetta or personal beef would stop at nothing to say nasty and wrongful things about you. i'm not that type of person. i was'nt raised that way (i.e Sponger). i say what i have to say without having to resort to getting personal or getting offensive.
|
|
#44
09-30-2004, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
it\'s not about being picky. it\'s about, if you gonna use...
[ QUOTE ]
"don't get me wrong, but simply giving credit where it's not due is going above and beyond." Are you being a bit picky? Yeah technically he wasn't leading from day 1. He was 4th after day 1 in the top 10 or so each day. I think one day he dropped out of the top 10. Ken [/ QUOTE ] a particular argument to support Greg's case, make sure it's not punched so full of holes that you could strain spaghetti with it. it's just like at a live poker table, observant people pick up on damn near everything, even if it's a small tell. my point with when he began leading is no different.
|
|
#45
09-30-2004, 11:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Paul, it\'s statements like the one this guy made...
I have known a lot of kids like you, who are like "respect is earned, I don't care if everyone else respects you, you have to earn my respect personally!!" Now that I realize you fit into this group, I can apply what I have learned, which is that it's not worth the effort to try and convince any of you otherwise.
|
|
#46
09-30-2004, 11:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
first of all, i\'m a grown man BUT you pretty
[ QUOTE ]
I have known a lot of kids like you, who are like "respect is earned, I don't care if everyone else respects you, you have to earn my respect personally!!" Now that I realize you fit into this group, I can apply what I have learned, which is that it's not worth the effort to try and convince any of you otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] much got me dead on with the respect thing. funny thing about your realization is i'm not concerned with you not trying to convince me of anything otherwise. i'll live on as much as it hurts me to say that.
|
|
#47
09-30-2004, 11:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: and that\'s where i see that you may be disillusioned...
[ QUOTE ]
it was'nt luck for Dan Harrington to win in '95 and make two more final tables, which happened to to be the biggest two fields in WSOP ME history. [/ QUOTE ] Yes it was. If you watched the coverage, Dan was all in as a significant underdog in the middle stages of the tournament, and sucked out to stay alive. Dan is a good player, but has been the recipient of some extraordinary luck when it comes to the main event. Justin A
|
|
#48
09-30-2004, 11:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: and that\'s where i see that you may be disillusioned...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] it was'nt luck for Dan Harrington to win in '95 and make two more final tables, which happened to to be the biggest two fields in WSOP ME history. [/ QUOTE ] Yes it was. If you watched the coverage, Dan was all in as a significant underdog in the middle stages of the tournament, and sucked out to stay alive. Dan is a good player, but has been the recipient of some extraordinary luck when it comes to the main event. Justin A [/ QUOTE ] my point is not about one play. it's about consistency over a long period of time. that's one of my main arguments that i bring up when people overexaggerate Greg's tourney performances. i respect a player with a proven track record that one can go back and reference. one in which is not centered around one locale, but one where consistent success has been achieved all over. Dan Harrington has 4 WSOP ME final tables and i think he finished no lower than 5th or 6th in any of them. look at how many final tables Phil Hellmuth has in the WSOP as a whole. look at the bracelets he has. look at Johnny Chan or Doyle. even young guns like Phil Ivey and Daniel Negreanu. they have bracelets and consistent tourney success abroad. along with their cash game prowess, speaks volumes about their status as elite players. this is not about luck on one hand.
|
|
#49
10-01-2004, 12:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: and that\'s where i see that you may be disillusioned...
[ QUOTE ]
my point is not about one play. it's about consistency over a long period of time. that's one of my main arguments that i bring up when people overexaggerate Greg's tourney performances. i respect a player with a proven track record that one can go back and reference. one in which is not centered around one locale, but one where consistent success has been achieved all over. Dan Harrington has 4 WSOP ME final tables and i think he finished no lower than 5th or 6th in any of them. look at how many final tables Phil Hellmuth has in the WSOP as a whole. look at the bracelets he has. look at Johnny Chan or Doyle. even young guns like Phil Ivey and Daniel Negreanu. they have bracelets and consistent tourney success abroad. along with their cash game prowess, speaks volumes about their status as elite players. this is not about luck on one hand. [/ QUOTE ] My post did not come across as intended. The point was that Dan could have easily been eliminated this year despite his skill. Dan's finishing in four final tables does not prove that he's a good player. That's all I was saying. He's been luckier than the other pros who have been playing all these years. Btw, is Chip Reese a good player? Where are his tournament results? How about Lyle Berman? They're both in the hall of fame, but have very little to show for it when it comes to tournaments. Greg Raymer is a good player because he has proved it with his play over the years. It is possible to say that he is a good player based on that knowledge. His lack of tournament experience does not mean that he's not a good player. This is where your logic breaks apart. Do you see why? Justin A
|
|
#50
10-01-2004, 12:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am getting sick of my friends saying \"Raymer just got lucky.\"
[ QUOTE ]
The micro results matter so very little. [/ QUOTE ] Well, I just watch Rounders tonight and Mike McDermott beat Johnny Chan with rags and racked up - then told Joey, "I played with the best in the world, and I won!" So, since Rounders is the ultimate poker authority, I think I have to disagree. MICRO RESULTS DO MATTER (at least on the big screen)
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
