Poker Cowardice

[jwinslow]

First, enforcement would be very difficult. Where do you draw the line - photo-gray glasses, wraparound Oakleys, etc? How much forehead is showing when somebosy wears a baseball cap? That would be a problem, and lead to a lot of stupid complaints and weird rulings by tournament officials.

Fair enough. Perhaps as a compromise, they could smack the sunglass offenders in the head with a mackerel.

Secondly, I think the TV types don't mind the different looks, since it adds 'characters' to the broadcast - the Unabomber, 'Jesus' Ferguson, the Scandinavian guy who wears his shades upside down. Different looks, and obnoxious comments made by assholes like Matusow and Hellmuth, all probably increase ratings; as opposed to to a bunch of guys sitting around calmly tossing chops into the pot.

Probably true, though they apparently outlawed outrageous celebrations/gesticulations because of some guy the year before. I flipped over to the '08 tourney a few days ago and saw something along those lines (which renewed my distaste for the sunglasses).

 

[Ttown]

I wouldn't say the word cowardly because it takes bravery to put up that much money just to get in.

You could say that they are trying to protect their investment.

 

[MolGenBuckeye]

I wouldn't say the word cowardly because it takes bravery to put up that much money just to get in.

You could say that they are trying to protect their investment.

Sort of like Barry Bonds. Nothing wrong with legal equipment, right?

 

[souL]

So what's holding you back,specifically, from playing on espn? If you have by all means I'll give you all the credit in the world. It would just sound rather odd,if you haven't won huge,yet piss on a 2 million dollar win like it's nothing.

In case you were wondering, I'm getting there. I mean the 2-7 KC lowball events at the WSOP are bigger than the main event Moneymaker won, so a win in 2009 is a totally different thing from a win in 2003. I've played in one World Series event, and it's the only 4 figure buyin I've ever been involved in. Unfortunately, I started playing I at the very bottom, where I had to wade through 2500 people in a free tournament to get to a 1$ prize. At least I'm proud to say I've never ever played poker with my own money. As I get better and the prizes I get grow larger, I'm starting to make some pretty good poker playing friends. We've already tested some larger long-term stakes (they give me the money to play certain tournaments and we chop profits according to prior arrangements) with decent results, and by this time in 2010 I hope to have a decent WSOP itenerary set up. I'm closing the gap between me and world-class omaha players every day. I'm still in the prime of my life and have many World Series left, I don't think it's out of the question that I have more bracelets than Money one day.

And anyone who wins the Main Event today usually wades through about 9,000 more people than Money did. It's probably why every champion since he won has been exponentially better than him.

You're obvioulsy not listening to me either when I say: you're looking at ONE tournament. Money's been a negative player since he won that tournament. Which of course means he loses money today. I do not play the same stakes as Money, but when he does deign to come down to my level I make sure to make him realize just how bad of a player he is, on any level. We've been at the same table 3 times, and the same final table once. I busted him twice and they moved him once.

He's much like you, living in the past during the luckiest week of his life. The only thing Chris has ever done, in my eyes, has gone down as the least skilled WSOP main event winner ever.

 

[powerlifter]

Just because I can't cover a D1 WR doesn't mean Morgan Trent is a good cornerback.

Yea,I've heard that on multiple occasions from you...Call me crazy,but I think there's a difference in physical talent,and playing cards...but that's just me. Laugh Laugh Laugh giggle giggle and what not.

As evident by all of your posts in this thread you really don't have a grasp on poker knowledge. Poker is not a sport like football like or basketball in which you must have years of practice and training to even compete with the pros. To say someone is not good, especially someone like Moneymaker who won before the poker surge, is not like saying a professional football or basketball player is not good.

As evident by all of your posts in this thread you really don't have a grasp on reading.

In case you were wondering, I'm getting there. I mean the 2-7 KC lowball events at the WSOP are bigger than the main event Moneymaker won, so a win in 2009 is a totally different thing from a win in 2003. I've played in one World Series event, and it's the only 4 figure buyin I've ever been involved in. Unfortunately, I started playing I at the very bottom, where I had to wade through 2500 people in a free tournament to get to a 1$ prize. At least I'm proud to say I've never ever played poker with my own money. As I get better and the prizes I get grow larger, I'm starting to make some pretty good poker playing friends. We've already tested some larger long-term stakes (they give me the money to play certain tournaments and we chop profits according to prior arrangements) with decent results, and by this time in 2010 I hope to have a decent WSOP itenerary set up. I'm closing the gap between me and world-class omaha players every day. I'm still in the prime of my life and have many World Series left, I don't think it's out of the question that I have more bracelets than Money one day.

And anyone who wins the Main Event today usually wades through about 9,000 more people than Money did. It's probably why every champion since he won has been exponentially better than him.

You're obvioulsy not listening to me either when I say: you're looking at ONE tournament. Money's been a negative player since he won that tournament. Which of course means he loses money today. I do not play the same stakes as Money, but when he does deign to come down to my level I make sure to make him realize just how bad of a player he is, on any level. We've been at the same table 3 times, and the same final table once. I busted him twice and they moved him once.

He's much like you, living in the past during the luckiest week of his life. The only thing Chris has ever done, in my eyes, has gone down as the least skilled WSOP main event winner ever.

I've beaten moneymaker like a dog whenever we're at the same table..

At first I was under the impression you have played him more then 3 times. Playing the devil's advocate Moneymaker could easily say to you
"You haven't really played for high stakes,and won"

Oddly enough I wouldn't have ever guessed "living in the past" is one thing I do. However,if that is something that will boost your ego while you type..Then so be it..I heard it's good for self esteem..

 

[souL]

Oddly enough I wouldn't have ever guessed "living in the past" is one thing I do. However,if that is something that will boost your ego while you type..Then so be it..I heard it's good for self esteem..

Seriously? I'm not making any assumptions about you, I was talking about you not budging from Money's win 6 years ago as some sort of reference point for this guy's validation. No need to get overly defensive.

 

[BUCKYLE]

As evident by all of your posts in this thread you really don't have a grasp on reading.

With my limited grasp of the written word, I'm unable to figure out if you were talking to 'ballin', me, or yourself with this post.

 

[Gatorubet]

With my limited grasp of the written word, I'm unable to figure out if you were talking to 'ballin', me, or yourself with this post.

Did he say "Sparky", huh?


:p

 

[CCI]

if anybody who puts 10 G's to play in the WSOP, damm right they have the option to wear what the hell they want tp be it shades, false teeth, ect....Don't forget the IPOD
The most money I have ever won is about a grand in some home town tournaments for hospice. VFW's have games every weekend, good ole boys getting together for a friday night trying to hustle and make a few extra bucks.

 

[Piney]

And anyone who wins the Main Event today usually wades through about 9,000 more people than Money did. It's probably why every champion since he won has been exponentially better than him.

You're obvioulsy not listening to me either when I say: you're looking at ONE tournament. Money's been a negative player since he won that tournament. Which of course means he loses money today. I do not play the same stakes as Money, but when he does deign to come down to my level I make sure to make him realize just how bad of a player he is, on any level. We've been at the same table 3 times, and the same final table once. I busted him twice and they moved him once.

He's much like you, living in the past during the luckiest week of his life. The only thing Chris has ever done, in my eyes, has gone down as the least skilled WSOP main event winner ever.

Actually I think Yang has been the worst WSOP champion, and to call Moneymake the worst skilled WSOP champion is wrong, how quickly people forget about Varkonyi as he truly was the worst WSOP champ Q9, best hand ever! (but Yang might challenge him on that)

While you can call Moneymaker a negative player in tournament results, how many of those tournaments did he actually have to pay to get in? Versus being fronted by his sponsor? So if he enters 10 tournaments a year and doesn't have to pay a cent to enter them, just one cash makes him a 'positive' winner.

But Moneymaker is everyone's favorite whipping boy, probably cuz he makes all of his money just from his name & marketing versus actually winning tournaments anymore.

 

[CCI]

Yang If he didn't catch great cards in the WSOP.What has he won since?

 

[powerlifter]

Actually I think Yang has been the worst WSOP champion, and to call Moneymake the worst skilled WSOP champion is wrong, how quickly people forget about Varkonyi as he truly was the worst WSOP champ Q9, best hand ever! (but Yang might challenge him on that)

While you can call Moneymaker a negative player in tournament results, how many of those tournaments did he actually have to pay to get in? Versus being fronted by his sponsor? So if he enters 10 tournaments a year and doesn't have to pay a cent to enter them, just one cash makes him a 'positive' winner.

But Moneymaker is everyone's favorite whipping boy, probably cuz he makes all of his money just from his name & marketing versus actually winning tournaments anymore.

I think this actually twists the original topic from Jwinslow,and other statements made in this thread all together. Usually people who are weird looking or do something "strange" are tagged with having more "personality". In turn, with even an isolated big win..It's more marketable,then other people who are probably more deserving of the fame.

The advantage/disadvantage of wearing certain things may be very small,but if it was any of us on this board or anywhere else,and there was an opportunity to make more money with sponsors...If you can make a career out of playing cards,then it's a hell of a lot better then most.

 

[CCI]

If you can make a career out of playing cards,then it's a hell of a lot better then most.

Hell yeah, but I think investing alot of time and $$$$ will get anybody there. Go to Vegas and sit with the pros, they are there.

 

[Ttown]

Gotta love the way the old timers get all pissed off at the way the noob's play and call them names and sh it.

 

[souL]

Actually I think Yang has been the worst WSOP champion, and to call Moneymake the worst skilled WSOP champion is wrong, how quickly people forget about Varkonyi as he truly was the worst WSOP champ Q9, best hand ever! (but Yang might challenge him on that)

While you can call Moneymaker a negative player in tournament results, how many of those tournaments did he actually have to pay to get in? Versus being fronted by his sponsor? So if he enters 10 tournaments a year and doesn't have to pay a cent to enter them, just one cash makes him a 'positive' winner.

But Moneymaker is everyone's favorite whipping boy, probably cuz he makes all of his money just from his name & marketing versus actually winning tournaments anymore.

Final tabling the main event is probably enough for anyone to retire at this point in the games popularity. Between the prize money and the likely website endorsements you pick up (becoming a member of team pokerstars is a pretty sweet deal) you can coast. I know that off the top the deal for Team Pokerstars members is 50$/hr when you're logged in playing, X amount of tournament buyins, and the opportunity to play the Player of the Week on pokerstars heads up for anywhere from 2-5k for no cost to you at least 3 times a year are all part of the package. Between the hours I log on there now and just that deal alone I'd probably be able to do that for the rest of my life.

Rob Varykoni is lucky enough to have a wife that's decent at poker, and she helps him with his game a lot. He has a coach and even though he won the ME he still doesn't play nearly the event schedule that most players do. He's improving a lot and his game's just a lot more solid than Money's. Money's aggression and unpredictability might be able to spur a deep run again one day but he lacks the focus and discipline it takes to grind out all those 12-15 hour days.

Really, Varykoni the guy that started the poker boom. The field nearly quadrupled from the year he won to Moneymaker's run in 2003, the game was already snowballing then ESPN turned it into a full blown avalanche. In any case, it is definitely those 3 on the short list.

Look, I'm not saying Chris Moneymaker went broke. I'm not saying he's living on the street or he's a pariah. I'm just saying the guy hasn't turned a profit at the tables in 6 years and that makes him not very good.

If you can make a career out of playing cards,then it's a hell of a lot better then most.

That's a popular misconception of the poker world. For everyone on top of the poker world winning million dollar prizes or 500k pots on High Stakes Poker, there are 100 players like me. Skilled amateurs who do it for fun or fringe pros grinding out medium stakes and recording every single minute of their play. Living on your wits alone is a very stressful thing, and even a decent player understands the kinds of swings a poker player can face. If you're not ready for them emotionally and financially it can ruin you. It's not easy looking at a work month in the red, but I've done it.