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

[jack spade23]

Raymer won his share of coin flips, this is true. But so did a lot of people ( and beleive it or not, they still do!) I believe that raymer played well, took some risks, and came out on top. No one can say that any other former wolrd champ won without luck. What if a third (was it a nine?) came up for Farha instead of another 5 for Moneymaker?

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fair point.

However he did push in - which is a lot different than being called. He also pushed in with 2 over cards and the Nut Flush draw. I don't think many people would have called here, and also I think Mike had about a 3-2 chip lead on him. He was very crippled after losing this.

I think it would have been looked at much differently if Greg called the all in here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely...I was just pointing out that Greg did win some 50/50s where it would've either knocked him out or severely crippled him.

[/ QUOTE ]

out the genuis after it's already occurred. had it been the other way, there is no discussion.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The man has been on here answering tourney questions for a long time. Many, Many (myself included) people on here have soaked up a wealth of information from him. He was HIGHLY regarded well BEFORE the WSOP... So why is it now, when he cashes, people want to bring him down? I'll tell ya, JEALOUSY!! Look, EVERYONE got BOTH lucky AND unlucky at times in that tourney, but the facts are he WON it (with class I might add). So those of you who want to bash, you have no ground to stand on. His results speak.

Thanks Greg for continuing to lurk and post here, WE appreciate it (most of us)

fireman

if you think he got lucky, so be it. Your just not going to convince those of us who have used him to further our own game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the large majority of people here have it right...

Hes a very good player, who played at the top of his game for a few days, got very lucky, and won a huge tourney.

Its a select few who are unfortunately more vocal than the majority that makes us think that a lot of people here view him as either one of the two extremes: totally lucky or a poker god who can't be beaten.

[/ QUOTE ]

i, for one, thinks he got extremely fortunate, especially in those coinflips at the final table (i think like he got like 2 river catches). if i remember correctly, he was behind in everyone except one, which he lost.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone is saying that Greg is up there with those world class players. Personally, without having seen anything of his play except this year's WSOP, I'd only feel comfortable putting him in the top 1000-1500 poker players in the world. He surely could be higher, but I'm not sure yet and there are tons of great players in the world. I don't think anyone here is saying that Greg is one of the best players in the world.

[Lurshy]

Greg,

Another tactic to respond to these people is something like...

'You are correct, I am not that good, only lucky on occasion. Wanna play?' [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

From watching how you have conducted yourself (per the net, & press) over the past year, count me a FAN!

Good Luck,

Lurshy

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
All I can say is threads like this are fairly dissapointing. The wpt forum is a detriment to 2+2. Threads like this are also likely to drive away a valuable poser like Greg because everytime he posts its like hes on trial or something. Its so silly. I can't beleive the time someone like desdia has put into this thread. It boggles the mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but if the WPT forum didn't exist then these threads would spill over into other forums and ruin them. At least they are contained here so that people like you who don't like them can just ignore this forum.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All I can say is threads like this are fairly dissapointing. The wpt forum is a detriment to 2+2. Threads like this are also likely to drive away a valuable poser like Greg because everytime he posts its like hes on trial or something. Its so silly. I can't beleive the time someone like desdia has put into this thread. It boggles the mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but if the WPT forum didn't exist then these threads would spill over into other forums and ruin them. At least they are contained here so that people like you who don't like them can just ignore this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

GOD bless freedom of choice.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]

it was merely to point out that anybody can come on 2+2 and demostrate vast poker knowledge, but for all you know, they could be an imposter.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

And how exactly would they 'make up' this poster knowledge?

I'll be the first to admit that every great poker player doesn't necessarily have the skill to put his thought in words(cough cough Phil Hellmuth cough cough), but I don't think it works the other way around- If you can explain poker concepts well, then you clearly have an understanding of the game.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The man has been on here answering tourney questions for a long time. Many, Many (myself included) people on here have soaked up a wealth of information from him. He was HIGHLY regarded well BEFORE the WSOP... So why is it now, when he cashes, people want to bring him down? I'll tell ya, JEALOUSY!! Look, EVERYONE got BOTH lucky AND unlucky at times in that tourney, but the facts are he WON it (with class I might add). So those of you who want to bash, you have no ground to stand on. His results speak.

Thanks Greg for continuing to lurk and post here, WE appreciate it (most of us)

fireman

if you think he got lucky, so be it. Your just not going to convince those of us who have used him to further our own game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the large majority of people here have it right...

Hes a very good player, who played at the top of his game for a few days, got very lucky, and won a huge tourney.

Its a select few who are unfortunately more vocal than the majority that makes us think that a lot of people here view him as either one of the two extremes: totally lucky or a poker god who can't be beaten.

[/ QUOTE ]

i, for one, thinks he got extremely fortunate, especially in those coinflips at the final table (i think like he got like 2 river catches). if i remember correctly, he was behind in everyone except one, which he lost.

[/ QUOTE ]


My exact words were 'very luck'. I guess the question that needs to be asked is "Do you think he got more or less lucky to other world champs since this event has exploded in popularity?" I think its about equal, which means he should be repsected as a world champ.

[WinBig]

[ QUOTE ]
here's an example for others in what i look at: Barry Greenstein had a post where he said something to the affect that he's played maybe 100 tournaments within the last year and a half to two years and won like 7 of them. now along with thos 7 wins he's also had probably 20+ final tables during that span and numerous smaller cashes. let's just say total that he's cashed in 35 tournaments (which could be more) out of 100. the majority of his cashes are at final tables and a lot of his wins are BIG wins in BIG tournaments. that's what i look at, that's what i respect. when people say Barry is a world class player, not only can you look to his peers to reference his cash game prowess but you can also look at how well he's done in tournaments (and he's done well everywhere, not just locally in Vegas).

[/ QUOTE ]

I enjoy your assumptions and how you base your analysis on them. Would you care to get some actual figures to backup your case or is it possible the actual numbers don't do so?