Ladies Limit Hold Em on ESPN

[toots]

Personally, I think Ivey comes to the table dressed like a slob in that stupid basketball jersey. Too bad, because he's a good looking guy. Hellmuth in his windbreaker and cap just looks completely unmannered to me.

I've never mentioned it before because:

1) People's ideas of what's stylin' and what isn't differ considerably.
2) They aren't there to make me happy
3) Most importantly: It's about the poker, not the looks

For the life of me, I've seen very few people at the poker table who I thought were dressed decently and looked well groomed. Most of them are there in their casual clothes, acting like they're at a friendly game. That's not maintaining some professional dress code, it's just concentrating on what's important.

Odd, that I think one of the very few well dressed players is Annie's brother. Then again, my perception's probably skewed by the fact that I find him to be a total babe, all of which is completely irrelevant when it comes to his poker skills.

[ohgeetee]

It doesn't matter to me how they dress, nor whether or not they are male or female. What I look for is how they present themselves while playing and after they have played.

We get to see Annie Duke give interviews about how horribly her amateur opponents played, when in fact they aren't amateur in many cases and smoked her, we get to read Phil Hellmuth's cardplayer articles where he basically spends the entire time going over his bad beats or giving us an update on his 'deals', etc.

Then we watch John Juanda lose to some RV guy and he gives logical reasons that an amateur may have an edge (he said "they are willing to take many more risks than most pros would take") WITHOUT sounding like an arrogant prick, and when he lost, he lost graciously.

During the Foxwoods event we saw Howard constantly give great commentary on decisions the "amateur" made, without making it sound like the guy was there because his lotto numbers were called.

I could go on and on. As with any sport, there are 2 sides to every coin, and there are fans that like one side more than another.

IMO, with poker so close to becoming household dinner talk, the Lederers, Iveys, Fergusons, Seidels, Juandas, Brunsons, Harmons, Negreanus, etc. are what is pushing that edge, while people like Hellmuth, Duke, Fischman, are all slowing things down.

When a 'sport' has its feet in the ground, theres plenty of room for the outcasts to make their mark, but when its trying to make its way, that [censored] hurts more than it helps, particularly when poker and gambling are already viewed in such a negative light.

[playerfl]

ok, so in a cash limit game its possible to run hot for weeks at a time and its all just variance, but in a tourny its skill ?

I'm legitimately asking because I don't see the attraction to limit tourny's.

[ohgeetee]

In a cash game the blinds aren't escalating at a breakneck pace. Apples and Oranges.

[B Dids]

Nobody (at least not I) is denying that Annie doesn't have the most engaging personality. Frankly, based on what I've heard from her she doesn't impress me as a person.

If people want to attack her on that level, I can't take issue with them. It's when it comes down to casting judgements on how she is as a person based on how she looks that I have to call BS.

Also, judging anybody based on what they said after busting out of the biggest tournament of the year (or hell, after winning a big tournament) is silly. Judge people on the whole of their actions, not at a time when their emotions will be the most out of control.

And lastly, the notion that people will be turned off of poker because of how Fischman and Duke act seems incorrect to me. Nobody stopped watching basketball because of Dennis Rodman. People need villans for their stories, and having some "bad guys" will only make poker more entertaining for the non-poker-savy audience. (I'd also wager that non-poker players probably like Annie a lot more than poker players, who've heard more about her, do).

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
And lastly, the notion that people will be turned off of poker because of how Fischman and Duke act seems incorrect to me. Nobody stopped watching basketball because of Dennis Rodman. People need villans for their stories, and having some "bad guys" will only make poker more entertaining for the non-poker-savy audience. (I'd also wager that non-poker players probably like Annie a lot more than poker players, who've heard more about her, do).

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. There's no threads on Joe Awada today that I've seen. Yet this topic has 50+ responses?

I really don't get why people care about what Annie Duke says/does/thinks/chooses to wear. I do think some of her comments are annoying, but man, I'm not wasting energy hating her as intensely as some of you.

Regarding the women's event, if I was her I wouldn't enter either. It's insulting I think, to suggest that women need their own event. The only advantage men have over women in this "sport" is sheer numbers. It's not the same as something like golf where Tiger has a clear advantage over Annika.

I'm not an Annie Duke fan, but I respect the fact that she's now won a bracelet, in a very tough event. And all I know is those of you who criticize her for her clothing/hair/makeup choices better look your best 100% of the time in whatever your profession is.

[playerfl]

ok, but that would seem to increase the luck factor, not decrease it.

[Richie Rich]

Good point about Ivey. You're right, he doesn't dress like a "professional" (poker player, that is), but at least he conveys himself well at the table. He isn't constantly chatting nonsense-dialect at the table, with this feet up, looking ungroomed like some other people...

And one last time...NOT ALL POKER PLAYERS (professional or amateur or recreational) are expected to appear or act a certain way. Players like Fischman, Scotty Nguyen, Unabomber, etc. are perfect examples of good players who don't fit the "professional etiquette & mold". But then again, they aren't considered part of the elite group either...

[playerfl]

I agree completely.

[slogger]

But in the hand you're talking about (player who said, "I had a straight draw on the flop" after rivering her flush), didn't she flop a gutshot with a backdoor flush draw and an overcard. That's comes to about 8 outs, assuming the other lady's got anything at all.

Also, IIRC, they were shorthanded at this point and the play involved one or both of the blinds. The flop play was a little LAG, but her comment on the end was exactly what I was thinking when her opponent grimaced after seeing the rivered flush.

FWIW, on the turn, she had at least 14 outs to win (though not 100 percent sure about the 2-3 non-flush overcard outs - I may be imagining the overcard).