moneymaker/fossilman who's the real deal??

[muckdumper]

fossilman has a darn great game where as monkeymaker has not improved anywhere to stay on top was it pure luck and smaller field?still a great accomplisment but come on 7-2!!fossilman has a better chance of being on a main event final wsop table again .good luck champ [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]your game is a pleasure to watch [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[UATrewqaz]

This has been hashed to death but the general consensus is that Raymer is a very good, if not great player, while Moneymaker is rather mediocre.

[ismisus]

Truly Fossilman's style is very boring to watch. From what I seen, he gathers chips by pushing people out of the pot. Its not fun seeing a player go all in. I am not saying its a bad style, its just a boring style. I get it, you push, they fold, you win.

Now Farha, Ivey, Flack, Marcel, Dan Neg all have a style that is truly a pleasure to watch. They want to see a lot of flops, and they want to outplay their opponent without pushing a whole bunch of chips into the pot. No wonder they all made ESPN featured tables.

[DesertCat]

[ QUOTE ]
Truly Fossilman's style is very boring to watch. From what I seen, he gathers chips by pushing people out of the pot. Its not fun seeing a player go all in. I am not saying its a bad style, its just a boring style. I get it, you push, they fold, you win.

[/ QUOTE ]

You gathered this from ...? Oh, maybe you watched last years final table and thought the ten or so hands Greg played were representative of the thousands of hands he played that tournament alone?

I'll leave this to others to elaborate.

[Easy E]

[ QUOTE ]
the general consensus is that Raymer is a very good, if not great player

[/ QUOTE ]

I must have missed that final approved vote.

[ChrisMonkeymaker]

Nothing wrong with bluffing with 72. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

Sometimes you have to play the situation and follow your judgment not the cards.

[Sheik]

Found this on an ESPN chat with Robert Williamson III.

Dave (Philadelphia): Do you see Raymer, Moneymaker, or Varkonyi ever winning another bracelet?

Robert Williamson III: I think Moneymaker's game has come a long way. He is a solid player. I don't think he plays that many events anymore. Raymer plays a lot of events but I think even he would tell you that he rose to the occassion that year .. but is he consistently going to win? No. If Moneymaker spent more time playing, he could be a consistent winner.

Williamson Chat

[curmudgeon]

Fossilman is obviously better.
Moneymaker sucked out so many times, especially at the last few tables or against good players it was almost embarrasing. He made the final table only because he sucked out big time against Phil Ivey. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]

Robert Williamson III: I think Moneymaker's game has come a long way. He is a solid player. I don't think he plays that many events anymore. Raymer plays a lot of events but I think even he would tell you that he rose to the occassion that year .. but is he consistently going to win? No. If Moneymaker spent more time playing, he could be a consistent winner.


[/ QUOTE ]

All that most of us have to go on is what we see on TV and read in the press. Based on that, my impression has been just the opposite.

Based on what I have seen, Greg's play has been solid, but not world class. Moneymaker has not shown anything on TV since the WSOP.

Based on rewatching the 2003 WSOP, my impression is that Moneymaker is an instinctive, street-smart player who played over his head in the ME. My impression of Greg is that he is an analytical student of the game, and that he played a solid game in the 2004 ME, and got lucky. That is not to say that he is a bad player. You have to get lucky to win the ME. I just don't think that he can play at the same level as Doyle or Lederer or Ivey or Greenstein.

Williamson's remark about Moneymaker improving strikes me as odd. Again, just an impression based on media exposure. My impression of Moneymaker is that he does not read and think about the game enough, he relies too much on instinct and playing experience. He doesn't need to play more, he needs to study the game. I think that Raymer will improve faster than Moneymaker will, because he continues to be a student of the game. I think Chris has peaked.

[m bozeman]

You seem to forget on the hand where Moneymaker "sucked out", his AQ flopped a set, and Ivey had to get extremely lucky to hit his 2 outer on the turn. It was a great hand, but saying he sucked out would not be fair, since it is only part of the hand.