|
On March 12 2005 12:13 travis wrote:
u ppl who are saying pascal is a fish prolly have no idea what ur talking about :-(
there are diff styles of tournament play, and tight-aggressive is only one of them.
odds go beyond your % chance to win
He played all ins where he knew / couldn't be sure that he was behind for a large portion of his stack. Easy folds for him he simply pushed all in. He was a lucksack this tournament, an incredibly undeserving lucksack.
|
lucksack? lol i thought that was only a word in dutch.. "gelukzak"
|
|
|
|
|
On March 12 2005 20:03 FrinkX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2005 12:13 travis wrote:
u ppl who are saying pascal is a fish prolly have no idea what ur talking about :-(
there are diff styles of tournament play, and tight-aggressive is only one of them.
odds go beyond your % chance to win He played all ins where he knew / couldn't be sure that he was behind for a large portion of his stack. Easy folds for him he simply pushed all in. He was a lucksack this tournament, an incredibly undeserving lucksack.
first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about
and frink -
from what i read it sounded like he was doing more pushing than folding. even if u are behind, there's somethin called fold equity. you think ALL his chips were won on bad beats? you act like you were there.
trust me, if you win EPT vienna or france or wherever the hell this one was(i cant remember) chances are u aren't a fish.
jesus, so many people said the same thing about moneymaker after he won WSOP, cuz they saw T.V. coverage of him giving out some big bad beats in key hands. well guess what, moneymaker isn't a fish. He's a pretty good player.
sure, he's no john juanda or phil ivey, but how many players are? he sure as hell isn't dead money.
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
On March 12 2005 20:03 FrinkX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2005 12:13 travis wrote:
u ppl who are saying pascal is a fish prolly have no idea what ur talking about :-(
there are diff styles of tournament play, and tight-aggressive is only one of them.
odds go beyond your % chance to win He played all ins where he knew / couldn't be sure that he was behind for a large portion of his stack. Easy folds for him he simply pushed all in. He was a lucksack this tournament, an incredibly undeserving lucksack.
you are dumb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On March 13 2005 05:49 travis wrote:
first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about
Uhm... my exact words were
I disagree with Travis for defending pascal becuase Pascal made some pretty stupid plays in my opinion ( although I don't know the facts or how much he had to call cold / his chip stack at the time )
Therefore, how am I full of shit for anything, and or how can you say that with such disrespect =[ What I meant by this was that Those seemed like very stupid plays, let me elaborate incase you didn't understand:
If you have to call a raise of 1/4 of your stack with k-10 preflop, that would be a terrible call. That is why I mentioned how I didn't know how much he had to call cold ( if it was something like a fourth of his stack, or just something less which would prompt a call) and why I didn't know how much he had in chips, which are two factors <-- This was meant to be a disclaimer because I don't know the situation and am talking broad.
Next my comments about luck, if you played alot of poker, or even watched it, how many players have won back to back since Johnny Chan did it at the WSOP? None. Although this is partly due to the fact that their are sooo many great poker players every year, it is also due to the fact that luck plays a huge role in tournaments.
Not just bad beats are lucky, situational luck works, in WSOP2003 Scotty Nyguen gets dealt AA, vs a short stacked guy ( the wsop 2002 winner) who has KK, preflop events lead to an all in, thats just a lucky situation and he benefited a good amount of chips for it.
Even broader scope, the last 3 WSOP champions are amatuer as oppose to pro.
Raymer got KILLED at the Tournament of Champions becuase he made an an uncountable number of bad calls
And how do you even try to doubt that fact that with 2000++ players luck doesn't play a huge roll in the finals, since everyone is good enough to beat anyone in nearly the top 100 or even in a 500 man tourney their are still a huge group of those that are skilled.
Please don't assume I don't know anything about poker, and be a little bit more respectful?
[EDIT]: I do change my idea of chastizing Travis for defending him, since he definately isn't just a lucky scrub that doesn't deserve to win, but I do think that he had his fair share of luck to win this tournament.
|
if someone constantly has a big stack if he's around on day 3 it's not luck
|
i know im nowhere near the poker superstars you are and im not sure exactly how the hand vs elky happened. but if you call elkys push (if he pushed) when elky had a pretty good stack with KT..offsuit i think you cant think that you have more than 3 outs =\
or even if he pushed elky it was probably after elkys raise so it still wouldnt make any sense to me
maybe it just seems like bad play to me but if travis or rek could explain this to me itd be much appriciated.
|
he misread elky as "weak" probably putting him on AJo which elky would need to fold
but he had jacks
|
On March 13 2005 05:49 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2005 20:03 FrinkX wrote:On March 12 2005 12:13 travis wrote:
u ppl who are saying pascal is a fish prolly have no idea what ur talking about :-(
there are diff styles of tournament play, and tight-aggressive is only one of them.
odds go beyond your % chance to win He played all ins where he knew / couldn't be sure that he was behind for a large portion of his stack. Easy folds for him he simply pushed all in. He was a lucksack this tournament, an incredibly undeserving lucksack. first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about and frink - from what i read it sounded like he was doing more pushing than folding. even if u are behind, there's somethin called fold equity. you think ALL his chips were won on bad beats? you act like you were there. trust me, if you win EPT vienna or france or wherever the hell this one was(i cant remember) chances are u aren't a fish. jesus, so many people said the same thing about moneymaker after he won WSOP, cuz they saw T.V. coverage of him giving out some big bad beats in key hands. well guess what, moneymaker isn't a fish. He's a pretty good player. sure, he's no john juanda or phil ivey, but how many players are? he sure as hell isn't dead money.
Well obviously.... but i believe in elky's situation it was something like elky having 30k stack and pascal having ~100k? not exactly sure. Dunno, i dont think it's a smart play. I can't remember what elky said, but i believe each of these guys had decent sized stacks, just seems like too much risk for so many chips with such a great prize.
Rekrul, sounds like ur still a wee bit upset from when i lurped u in our HU
|
On March 13 2005 10:21 Suicide wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2005 05:49 travis wrote:
first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about
Even broader scope, the last 3 WSOP champions are amatuer as oppose to pro. Raymer got KILLED at the Tournament of Champions becuase he made an an uncountable number of bad calls
raymer did not get killed at the Tournament of champions and he did not make an uncountable number of bad calls.
|
On March 14 2005 15:14 amoeba wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2005 10:21 Suicide wrote:On March 13 2005 05:49 travis wrote:
first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about
Even broader scope, the last 3 WSOP champions are amatuer as oppose to pro. Raymer got KILLED at the Tournament of Champions becuase he made an an uncountable number of bad calls raymer did not get killed at the Tournament of champions and he did not make an uncountable number of bad calls.
neither of you supported your claims with any proof
|
On March 14 2005 21:47 FrinkX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2005 15:14 amoeba wrote:On March 13 2005 10:21 Suicide wrote:On March 13 2005 05:49 travis wrote:
first - suicide ur so full of shit u have no clue what ur talking about
Even broader scope, the last 3 WSOP champions are amatuer as oppose to pro. Raymer got KILLED at the Tournament of Champions becuase he made an an uncountable number of bad calls raymer did not get killed at the Tournament of champions and he did not make an uncountable number of bad calls. neither of you supported your claims with any proof
The burden of proof is on him. I can't look up and post every hand where he didn't make a bad call. On the other hand, if raymer did really make uncountable number of bad calls, Suicide can easily say post 4 hands where this occurred.
|
suicide i think what u mean is that he isn't "world class"
and i said ur full of shit because you said:
"but In order to win a poker tournament skill isnt really a factor, I find that skill will only take you to about the top 10% of the field, luck carries you the rest of the way and he had it"
which obviously does show you're full of shit since you contradict it in your next post when making the reference to the fact that there have been back to back wins before
|
Poker is very similar to SC 
|
oo my sexy elkyyyyy please win the money!!!!gogo gl hf gogo
s
t
a
r
t
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
