Ramer and Moneymaker

I'm a newbie here so please take it easy...I hope this is the right forum for the question.

Before Ramer and Moneymaker hit the big one does anyone know what games they frequented at pokerstars? Was it all NL, all MTT, SNGs? or if it was LH what level? 4/8? 5/10? much higher?

I've just been curious about this for a while.

thanks in advance.

[kevstreet]

Try and search for some of Raymer's (fossilman) posts. He has some wonderful advice on MTTs, his well thought out post on rebuys is very insightful. I'm not sure if he played a lot of cash games or not.

[Dynasty]

I believe Greg played as high as 150-300 at Foxwoods and a fairly big blind no-limit game as well.

Thanks I appreciate it. Didn't figure they went from 2/4 to the Main Event, but I'd always been curious.

[La Brujita]

Greg will probably find his way over so I hope I don't misquote him but iirc he always seemed to prefer mixed games or big bet games to straight limit he. He played pretty big as mentioned, and was already an accomplished tourney player before winning. He helped move many of our games foward with his advice.

[MRBAA]

Raymer was a well-known big stakes player at Foxwoods, with the reputation (and staking) of a solid winner from everything I heard.

Moneymaker, on the other hand, seems to have been a low limit online player who got pretty lucky and found his inner poker player at the right time.

If I had to guess, I'd say Moneymaker will be a loser for life at the table, just off what I read. That's typical for many name tourney players I think. But it's a different world now -- speaking, writing and endorsement opportunities mean he is likely to be a rich man as long as he doesn't gamble it away.

[Quicksilvre]

Raymer has been a big cheese on 2+2 for a while. If you look at the archives, you'll find people asking specifically for his advice since about Day One in the tournaments area (around 1999).

[DHamilton97]

Moneymaker is a better player than everyone gives him credit for. Pro's who played with him or watched him play live even admit that. I'm sure they know more than the people on this forum. At the time of his win he was a 1/2 player online. More than 2 years later now he's plays 30/60 - 40/80 - 50/100 and from I believe a mod on here says, has the skills to beat that game. Both very good players.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

All info is prior to 2004 WSOP

Live games:
cash - regularly 75-150 and 150-300 mixed games, and 300-600 once; for big bet games, regularly 5,5 and 5,10 NLH, and as big as 25,50 NLH and PLO
tourneys - regularly the weekly NLH tourney at Foxwoods, and had played in 10K buyin events a handful of times

Online:
cash - regularly the 75-150 Omaha8 game on PS, and also 30-60 stud8; also played in the biggest available NLH and PLO games
tourneys - regularly in the big one on Sundays, as well as many of the WCOOP events; would've played bigger, but they don't offer very big buyin events online regularly

As for Chris, the 2003 Main Event was his first live poker tournament, but he had played many of the daily events on PokerStars for some period of time. I am not sure, but I believe he had played at least 100 or more online tourneys. He also played cash games on PokerStars, though I am not sure which levels he frequented. He had also played live cash games, as high as 40-80 holdem, if I recall correctly.

Hope that satisfies your curiosity.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
...a mod on here says, (Moneymaker) has the skills to beat that game. Both very good players.

[/ QUOTE ]

On a couple occassions, I've repeated a comment from Clarkmeister who played with Chris Moneymaker in the Mirage 40-80 game for a while. Clarkmeister said he thought Moneymaker could probably beat that game.