How many of the BIG GAME players are the real deal?

Smoothcall · #1 05-06-2005, 04:06 PM

When i hear who sits in the big game (4-8k mixed games) i wonder who are the truley world class, and who are just people with money. That either play bad or ok but are not near world class. I mean someone has to be losing money. And even the ones not losing money, and holding there own doesn't mean they are world class.

And what makes them world class? My guess is there are a decent amount of players that play better than some of these guys in the big game. But are not rich enough or not willing to risk that kinda money. For instance. Lenny Martin, david sklansky, abdul, steve zoltow maybe, are all better limit holdem players than most of the guys in the big game. I would take them over the likes of daniel n, gus hansen, lyle berman, doyle brunson to name a few.

Alot of the big game players makes it sound like if you don't play in the big game, than you are not the best. Like barry g. looking down on 2nd tier players. But that doesn't have to be true does it? Look at Daniel N. He ddint play the game until recently but now that he made some money in tournaments and plays in the big game. Now probably thinks he is world class.

I bet if they were playing limit holdem. That me and some of my pro buddies(that are worse players than the likes of lenny martin probably) would not be the worst players in the game. And probably be favorites in the game. Assumming we had the bankroll or they played at our limits where all things would be more equal. I mean its limit holdem. If you know how to play it. How can they have a big edge on me? These guys are overrated imo.

So is there anybody that agrees with me? OKay start te flaming.

kurosh · #2 05-06-2005, 04:09 PM

STOP MAKING THREADS, JESUS CHRIST

Joboo · #3 05-06-2005, 04:11 PM

Well even if it is true that you would be a favorite at the big game playing Limit Hold 'Em (I doubt it, but I'm not really qualified to know either way), they play a mixed game, which is what probably keeps a lot of the pure specialists in individual games out, and favors more people who are good at every game, and possibly great at one.

Smoothcall · #4 05-06-2005, 04:32 PM

yes this is true. but the point i am trying to make is they may not be the best in the world. They may just have the most money. or most gamgle in them to play that high. And as far as saying about me and my friends. The point being is that if they are truley world class they should be able to handle me and my buddies with ease in any game.

Smoothcall · #5 05-06-2005, 04:34 PM

I thought you didnt want vince to make posts? And what is wrong with this post?

Btw be careful or i might change my mind and have you banned!

kurosh · #6 05-06-2005, 04:35 PM

The only game they couldn't beat you and your buddies in would be a circle jerk.

kurosh · #7 05-06-2005, 04:36 PM

Don't threaten me. Firstly, I said my name was "Vince," not Vincent Lempore. Secondly, it's blatantly obvious I'm not serious. Third, do you really think anyone in the world is going to side with you?

snakehead · #8 05-06-2005, 04:40 PM

if you and your buddies were that good, you'd be playing higher than 15-30. where do you think the big players got their bankrolls? (duh, maybe from playing poker?)

Smoothcall · #9 05-06-2005, 04:46 PM

It was obvious i was joking about being PP but i was banned in a heartbeat. And saying you were vince is enough. As only a complete blank would not know who you were trying to portray.

Smoothcall · #10 05-06-2005, 04:51 PM

Maybe not from poker. Most of the guys in that game have gotten rich through other sources. Except for the 3 young guys who won it in poker tournaments which is not live poker. A totally different game.

And me and my buddies are good. How good. I don't know what to compare too. But the point is we don't have to be that good becasue they are not that good. I play 15-30 becasue i am a big fish in a small pond. I should and probably will play higher very soon. But i'm ultra conservative. But that does not mean i am not good because i dont play higher. That is my point of the whole post. Mason mallmuth and roy cooke played 30-60 for years when they probably had funds to play higher. Did that make them not good poker players? David sklansky does play in the real big games. Does that mean he is not a good player? You're logic is flawed!