|
|
#52
12-16-2005, 03:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Who do you think you are? [/ QUOTE ] read the rest of the thread please. i was explaining why i moved it from hush to here. my reasons were dumb considering those other threads were here too. i dont understand everyones reaction to what i wrote 
|
|
#53
12-16-2005, 03:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Who do you think you are? [/ QUOTE ] A moderator. I completely agree with his actions and reasoning. The Schneids/Gonores 60k in 60 days challenges were so great because they are talented writers as well as poker players, and they wrote about a lot of other stuff that was going on in their lives.
|
|
#54
12-16-2005, 03:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
Not that Dave needs another defender, but I have played a ton with Dave live and he is a very strong player and good poster. I think people had issue with your original post b/c you were basically saying that he was not at a certain level of "status". When in fact, Dave has played and beaten very big games and been a poster for a long time on 2+2.
|
|
#55
12-16-2005, 04:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
[ QUOTE ]
Not that Dave needs another defender, but I have played a ton with Dave live and he is a very strong player and good poster. I think people had issue with your original post b/c you were basically saying that he was not at a certain level of "status". When in fact, Dave has played and beaten very big games and been a poster for a long time on 2+2. [/ QUOTE ] i said that people wouldnt take as active an interest in it and i believe that to be true. i guess i let my mood affect my tone and i apologize for that
|
|
#56
12-16-2005, 04:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
Jesus everyone CHILL. I have played a little with Dave, and i know that he is an EXCELLNT player. But moving the post here doesnt make it any less significant, and anyone who knows Josh and is familiar with his contributions to 2+2 should understand that his intentions were not bad here.
|
|
#57
12-16-2005, 04:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
the 15 and 20 are great, the big difference as far as i am conerened is the games are not quite as good and they are not 6 max. so the players don't tend to play quite as stupidly and you get many many few hands per hour.
dave
|
|
#59
12-16-2005, 03:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 60 days, 120,000 hands [/ QUOTE ] This sounds like a great way to start hating life. GoT [/ QUOTE ] Don't be jealous that your challenge is only 105k hands in like 92 days.
|
|
#60
12-16-2005, 03:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 60k in 60 days part 3
[ QUOTE ]
Jesus everyone CHILL. I have played a little with Dave, and i know that he is an EXCELLNT player. [/ QUOTE ] really now? ive played with dave as well (and ive played dave's chips for dave while dave does what dave needs to do...i'll add here that he gave me $$ for increasing his chip stack size in his absense which just goes to show how good of a guy he is imo) and ive found him to be a strong player. i guess i just dont see very many players as "excellent" so im a little taken a back at your use of that term with respect to dave. personally, dave is a bit too loose/agro for my tastes, especially when it gets SH and/or folds to him late. he's probably tightened it up a notch which would definately make him better imo. other than that, dave=goot...never enjoy having him at the table [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Barron
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
