will Brunson/chan WSOP dominance ever be repeated?

Never again in the Main Event.

[graydot]

I really dont understand the greatness of Brunsons double win, why is it so glorified?

in 1977 there were 34 entries
in 1976 there were 22 entries

Sure there were some pros, but im sure some rich donks aswell.

How hard is it to win a 22 man tourny and after a 34 tourny? Its like winning 2 sit and goes in a row, not a big deal.

Chens win was obv much more important, as it was 170 some people twice with a much harder field. Players are becoming more educated as its more analyzed. Chens 2nd place finish the year after is also a great feat.

[Godfather80]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Hachem will definitely repeat, maybe even three-peat.

[/ QUOTE ]

nh. Be sure to pay Pat Riley for the royalties on your phrasing, though.

[cognito20]

[ QUOTE ]
The US Government will likely kill online poker in time. But not yet. And it will become less and less lucrative. But just like 10 years ago, you'll always be able to find a game somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the second and third statements, but not necessarily with the first. You're always going to be able to find a game if you want one, and online poker will eventually become less lucrative when the poker boom maybe tails off (rather than dies out) a bit, and the fish either eventually get busted and give up or get a clue and become better players. I do not, however, see how the US government is -ever- going to be able to "kill" online poker. Any law they pass to that effect would not apply to the operators of the sites, since they are all based outside of the US's judicial and legislative jurisdiction and are therefore not subject to US laws, and they won't be able to -enforce- any such law inside the country anyway. It would very easy for US online poker players to just give the government the proverbial middle finger and say, "Screw you, I'm playing anyway." If the United States ever gets to the point, socially, where the police can actively enter people's homes and arrest them for playing a card game on their computer, I'm moving back to Australia (I have dual citizenship), and I'm never freaking coming back.

--Scott

[Salva135]

[ QUOTE ]


How hard is it to win a 22 man tourny and after a 34 tourny? Its like winning 2 sit and goes in a row, not a big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, it's JUST like winning 2 Party SNGs in a row. Man, it's too bad you weren't playing poker back then, because you totally would have won and then you would be like, one of the greatest poker legends of all time.

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


How hard is it to win a 22 man tourny and after a 34 tourny? Its like winning 2 sit and goes in a row, not a big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, it's JUST like winning 2 Party SNGs in a row. Man, it's too bad you weren't playing poker back then, because you totally would have won and then you would be like, one of the greatest poker legends of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's be realistic - he has a point. Brunson's achievement is not even close to winning two ME's in a row now.

[Salva135]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


How hard is it to win a 22 man tourny and after a 34 tourny? Its like winning 2 sit and goes in a row, not a big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, it's JUST like winning 2 Party SNGs in a row. Man, it's too bad you weren't playing poker back then, because you totally would have won and then you would be like, one of the greatest poker legends of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's be realistic - he has a point. Brunson's achievement is not even close to winning two ME's in a row now.

[/ QUOTE ]


I never said it was. The fact that it is more difficult to win now isn't even debatable. But to compare beating what was at the time a high-stakes tournament with the some of the world's best players, albeit in a small field, with beating a couple of $10 Sit n Go's and declare that it "isn't that big of a deal" is just ridiculously ignorant.