Texas hold 'em question (Now WSOP 2005 - Spoilers!) (1 Viewer)

[Nils Luehrmann]

I'm going to pretend I didn't see that you joker!

I actually miss playing limit poker as rarely do any of my regular games play limit.

I thought about bringing it up with our friendly HT group, but can you imagine Hank's reaction? He is still fuming over blinds and its been a couple years now.

The other problem I could foresee in playing limit poker with our HT group would be the lack of action compared to what we get with no-limit, and at those stakes, we need all the action we can get.

Perhaps you can start a limit tourney? I’ve been also anxious to play more Omaha, and that might be a good opportunity to combine the two.

 

[Steve Stogel]

Hee hee. I will still always go down with the ship on a paired board and the top full house. Yeah, Hank would have an absolute fit. Limit could be an interesting, and I'm not sure how little action there'd be. Think of how often Hank calls. Limit woiuld lead to everyone trying to make their draws. Depends on the limits I suppose.

If you're interested in Omaha, Fado's new 12 week series, or whatever, is Omaha, not HE. I went last Monday, and it was fun. Different game, to say the least. HE on steroids. Lot of fun, though.

 

[Alex-C]

I just had to share this with someone, played with some co-workers today and got a straight flush to the jack. ...to the jack ! damn and what's more, I was dealt J7 hearts so I drew to an inside straight

whoa...not many hands will beat that one.

My opponent had a straight.
Needless to say, we both went all in and it was all over.

 

[RichP]

You think they'd agree with me now?

 

[Brook K]

I was bummed when both Raymer and Ivey went down so quick yesterday. Raymer took a vicious beat, but I suppose he was due after all the races he survived last year. Ivey seemed to make some bad plays. He tried to steal too often and kept having to lay down when someone came over the top. He burned a lot of chips unnecessarily, at least that's what it seemed like from the play-by-play at Cardplayer.

I guess I'll root for Matusow because I'd like to see a pro win it again, but I don't like his table persona.

Going to St. Louis either next weekend or the weekend after so I'll be able to hit Ameristar and play.

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

...that are more like a lottery as you get players who will call holding just about anything pre-flop and thus raising the chances that eventually you'll get knocked out on a bad beat.

Besides, it would take you more than 50 years based on what you claim you average per month playing online to equal what Phil & Greg earned in six days playing in this year's WSOP main event. Seems like a poor choice on your part not to have entered the main event if you really felt strongly in your poker skills.

I don't think Phil or Greg regret entering this year's WSOP, but maybe they regret blowing their significant leads leading up to the final day.

In fact, the word out on the street is that Phil Ivey won a million dollars in a heads-up cash game with some whale earlier in the week at the Bellagio - so I'm sure he is in a good mood despite not having made it to the final table.

Personally I would have loved to have been able to play in the tournament, but having a wife and two kids under three at home keeps me from taking long poker trips to Vegas.

 

[RichP]

Well, you know what they say... those that can.. do. Those that can't, bitch about those that do on the Internet.

 

[RichP]

Here are the final 9, how they got here, and how many cashes they have in previous WSOP events:

1. Aaron Kanter - PartyPoker - 0
2. Tex Barch - Satellite - 4
3. Andrew Black - Satellite - 3
4. Mike Matusow - Satellite - 18
5. Steve Dannenmann - Paid - 0
6. Joe Hachem - Paid - 1
7. Dan Bergsdorf - Satellite - 0
8. Brad Kondracki - PokerStars - 0
9. Scott Lazar = Paid - 1

So of the final nine - excluding Matusow - you have a total of 9 previous WSOP cashes, and to even a Poker fan of the last 5 years, 8 of those nine names elicit a Who? This is not exactly a murderer's row final table, in fact it seems more like the kind of final table you'd see in a tournament with, oh, I don't know, ~6000 or so entrants.

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Very mature response... (that's sarcasm BTW)


You have a serious attitude problem and instead of supporting your arguments with facts, you make subjective blanket statements without regard to common sense or facts, and then malign anyone that chooses to disagree with you.

If you are into reading... try reading this:

How to spot a weak argument:


Then support your claims that someone should have laid down their A & (anything) when the board flopped A-10-10.

Then support your claim that this year's WSOP main event is nothing but a lottery with playing cards.

Or are you going to lash out every time someone points out the flaws in your logic and try your best to avoid the argument my making a schoolboy-like challenge or resort to childish name calling?

Shuffle-up & deal...

 

[RichP]

I did that too, sorry you missed it.

P.S., I'm still waiting for you to accept my $1k heads-up challenge....

 

[StephenK]

Now for something completely different

Does anyone know if there's a site that lists all entrants and their respective finishes?

Thanks

 

[RichP]

Cardplayer.com

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Thank you for making my point... obviously you realize just how weak your arguments are – and no, I wont partake in a ‘pissing contest’ that has nothing to do with the absurd comments you have made in this thread. Let me guess, did you challenge kids in school to a fight every time they disagreed with you?

Look, clearly there is no way to either reason with you, or even have a civilized conversation, so there is no motivation for me to discus this any further. If on the other hand you feel you must continue this conversation, by all means feel free to send me a PM so that we don’t litter this thread with personal attacks and get it closed down.

 

[RichP]

Which point was that? That you're a wisecracking "poker genius" behind your keyboard but when it comes time to put your $$ where your keyboard is you slink away? That point?

 

[RichP]

I apologize to all the other participants in this thread for allowing myself to get sucked into that.

I am sorry and will not derail this thread any further.

I would expect Nils to apologize as well for his contributions.

Sadly, I see that will not be the case. :frowning:

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Rich, you have some nerve I'll grant you that - and it's interesting that you assume that only winning hands are the correct play - I think most would disagree.

More to the point, the only one who has acted like a wisecracking "poker genius" has been you. You were the one that made the oh so considerate comment to Sami:
I could go on, but clearly there is plenty of evidence who has been trashing this otherwise pleasant thread with cocky wisecracking remarks.

And yes, I did purposefully throw back at you some of your own wisecracking comments in hopes you might pick-up on how 'cocky' you have come off in this thread. Unfortunately it didn't work.

NOW PLEASE STOP!

 

[RichP]

I really feel sorry for you Nils, no joking, no sarcasm, I really do.

Anyone that can get that upset by posts on a message board, must have bigger issues than I can fathom.

Once again I apologize, I didn't realize how sensitive you were about this whole thing.

Take care of yourself.

 

[Cees Alons]

Please, could you guys take the merely personal encounters to private space?

Thanks!

 

[Sami Kallio]

Oh please, give it up already!

 

[Brook K]

Somewhat back on topic, here's the final table today:

1. Aaron Kanter - $10,700,000 (seat 6)
2. Tex Barch - $9,330,000 (seat 3)
3. Andrew Black - $8,140,000 (seat 2)
4. Mike Matusow - $7,410,000 (seat 5)
5. Steve Dannenmann - $5,460,000 (seat 8)
6. Joseph Hachem - $5,420,000 (seat 1)
7. Daniel Bergsdorf - $5,270,000 (seat 4)
8. Scott Lazar - $3,370,000 (seat 9)
9. Brad Kondracki - $1,180,000 (seat 7)