Sign in to follow this  
Easy n Dirty

WSOP Updates

Recommended Posts

Dumb answer. The worst you can do is take the cash already in the pot. Best you can do is to add more chips to the pot so you can either take them all or chop. Either way betting you can't lose but CAN gain. Checking you CAN'T lose AND CAN'T gain.

 

Checking is the dumbest move you could possibly make.

 

Except when playing a pro. I've said before that I probably make a bet here. But I'm willing to bet Chad thought (and he might have over-estimated Kristy's ability) there was no way a pro is putting more chips into that pot and losing them. She would call and chop, or fold. So all I'm saying is yes, in theory, only betting will get more chips in the pot, but in reality, he didn't think there was a chance they'd be put in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did Sheiky finish, I have him on my list (although at 18th it wont help me catch BBP, but might push me back in front of Sky.)

 

He finished 3rd I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did Sheiky finish, I have him on my list (although at 18th it wont help me catch BBP, but might push me back in front of Sky.)

 

Sheikhy got 3rd.... hope to get the update done at lunch (which is in about an hour).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did Sheiky finish, I have him on my list (although at 18th it wont help me catch BBP, but might push me back in front of Sky.)

 

3rd ... somehow I missed that you had him ... and, so yes, you're now back in front of Sky...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Except when playing a pro. I've said before that I probably make a bet here. But I'm willing to bet Chad thought (and he might have over-estimated Kristy's ability) there was no way a pro is putting more chips into that pot and losing them. She would call and chop, or fold. So all I'm saying is yes, in theory, only betting will get more chips in the pot, but in reality, he didn't think there was a chance they'd be put in.

 

Pat, you're fighting a losing battle here. Checking with the nuts is never a good play and is essentially indefensible, yet you are trying to defend it. There is no downside at all to beting here...ever. At all. And there is some downside to checking, however slim you may think it is. To check here is a bad play, a very very bad play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pat, you're fighting a losing battle here. Checking with the nuts is never a good play and is essentially indefensible, yet you are trying to defend it. There is no downside at all to beting here...ever. At all. And there is some downside to checking, however slim you may think it is. To check here is a bad play, a very very bad play.

 

Look, I didn't say there was a down side to betting. Obviously, he can't lose chips, thus no downside. All I'm saying is he's not getting anymore chips out of this pot, and he knew it. Or at least he thought it. Based on Kristy's reaction, he was probably wrong. Maybe she would have called a small bet.

 

I was more trying to figure the reasoning behind checking. I don't think he checked becasue he didn't know what he had. I think he checked because he didn't think he get anymore out of the pot., and he was probably wrong.

 

I've had a similar situation before, a couple of times. Usually in Omaha. I've never checked it, but I'm not going to try and claim pro status either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the best bet here is something that would be big enough where you try to get the other player to think that you're buying the pot, hoping to sucker them in with a K or Q ...

 

For example, say you have pocket 8's and the flop comes 6 / 6 / 8 ... you're on a boat. You bet out the boat.

 

Next card is another 6 ... now any pocket pair is a boat, and if anyone has a 6, you're behind ... so you pull it back a bit.

 

River is the final 6 ... now you're wondering who else that is still in can beat your 8 kicker ... so, you bet big trying to steal a pot ... hoping that maybe the other person(s) don't have the nuts and therefore you steal the pot (maybe).

 

...so, if Gazes has (for example) the pocket 8's and Chad has A/blank, and she bets big (trying to steal), he raises and Gazes probably folds.

 

...however, if Gazes checks, Brown bets ... there is a chance that if he bet big enough, she may think that he's trying to buy it and she calls. A small bet would smell funny and she'd be more likely to fold (imo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder of the rules, regarding event 54:

 

Note: If a tournament pays LESS than 16 places, only the players who made the money will receive points.

 

Event 54 only paid 7 places, so only the top 7 finishers receive points. So, no points for Greenstien, Cunningham, etc.

 

And yes, I decided to do this before lunch instead of during.

 

 

Standings heading into the Main Event:

 

Player Score

BringBackPat 9972

cyclones 9428

skylive5 9086

muck 8928

SheikYerbuti 8216

Easy N Dirty 7764

TimC 7642

SeattleLawDawg 7452

wildcat3334 7432

TimmyPG 7408

kerwin8 7400

Big Country 7398

KState2000 7394

Tbone 65 7360

geeteebee 7146

spain 6940

chiefjay 6898

jaxfactor 6604

godtomsatan 5588

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's a crappy rule!

 

BTW, any idea why only seven got paid in the 2-7? Also, is there any rule of thumb in determining the relative payouts between finishes and how many people in a field get paid?

 

I'd guess it'd be something like the top 5-10% of the field will get paid (hence the top 7 of the 78 entries in the 2-7 tourney getting paid) ... but, figuring out what % goes to the first place finisher, 2nd place, etc. has escaped me. I know it's easy enough to put the payouts in excel and figure out the math ... I was curious if anyone had any insight (BC, SYB, etc) on how this is generally done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a reminder of the rules, regarding event 54:

Event 54 only paid 7 places, so only the top 7 finishers receive points. So, no points for Greenstien, Cunningham, etc.

 

And yes, I decided to do this before lunch instead of during.

Standings heading into the Main Event:

 

Player Score

BringBackPat 9972

cyclones 9428

skylive5 9086

muck 8928

SheikYerbuti 8216

Easy N Dirty 7764

TimC 7642

SeattleLawDawg 7452

wildcat3334 7432

TimmyPG 7408

kerwin8 7400

Big Country 7398

KState2000 7394

Tbone 65 7360

geeteebee 7146

spain 6940

chiefjay 6898

jaxfactor 6604

godtomsatan 5588

 

Damnit, Chad Brown has come along and stolen this pool from me red handed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, any idea why only seven got paid in the 2-7? Also, is there any rule of thumb in determining the relative payouts between finishes and how many people in a field get paid?

 

I'd guess it'd be something like the top 5-10% of the field will get paid (hence the top 7 of the 78 entries in the 2-7 tourney getting paid) ... but, figuring out what % goes to the first place finisher, 2nd place, etc. has escaped me. I know it's easy enough to put the payouts in excel and figure out the math ... I was curious if anyone had any insight (BC, SYB, etc) on how this is generally done?

 

7 got paid because single draw 2-7 lowball is played with 7 per table. They decided to only pay the final table, since there were only 78 players. As for the payout structure, every casino has a payout formula. It changes from house to house, but in general it goes something like this: Roughly 10% of the total field makes the money, with 1st place getting between 25-35% of the total prize pool, and then decreasing along a curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Damnit, Chad Brown has come along and stolen this pool from me red handed.

 

 

As an old poker friend of mine used to say: "It's a good day for the bad players!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 got paid because single draw 2-7 lowball is played with 7 per table. They decided to only pay the final table, since there were only 78 players.

 

Actually, the final table had eight players ... the first one eliminated on the final day was Greenstein. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As an old poker friend of mine used to say: "It's a good day for the bad players!"

 

Doesn't that make his 8th cash of this years World Series? And his 19th total at WS events? Seems like someone may be underestimating his ability just a bit :D

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #54 - WSOP No Limit Deuce to Seven Lowball World Championship

2nd $324,777 Jul 4, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #49 - WSOP No Limit Hold'em

140th $4,731 Jun 30, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #46 - WSOP 7 Card Stud Hi/Lo

33rd $3,890 Jun 28, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #42 - WSOP Omaha Hi/Lo

5th $43,606 Jun 25, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #34 - WSOP Limit Hold'em

11th $10,212 Jun 20, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #31 - WSOP Heads Up - No Limit Hold'em World Championship

47th $9,212 Jun 19, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #19 - WSOP No Limit Hold'em

75th $5,126 Jun 11, 2007

 

38th Annual World Series of Poker

Event #3 - WSOP No Limit Hold'em

98th $5,729 Jun 2, 2007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, 8 cashes at this year's WSOp is nothing to sniff at.

 

Are there any standings kept to determine which individual player is having the best World Series? I understand that there are a number of different ways to measure this (total number of cashes, or something along the lines of what BC does for our pool, plus various others I'm sure) - I'd be interested in knowing which players are having the best WSOp overall...and I suspect that with 8 cashes that Chad Brown would be toward the top of that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know some places track cashes. Hellmuth has the all-time lead in that category with 50-something. Money won would be a way, but not always the best way because one first place victory could be worth more than Chad's 8 cashes combined. Even though, imo, cashing 8 times is more impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, 8 cashes at this year's WSOp is nothing to sniff at.

 

Are there any standings kept to determine which individual player is having the best World Series? I understand that there are a number of different ways to measure this (total number of cashes, or something along the lines of what BC does for our pool, plus various others I'm sure) - I'd be interested in knowing which players are having the best WSOp overall...and I suspect that with 8 cashes that Chad Brown would be toward the top of that list.

 

For the top guys, its all about the bracelets, so I doubt that racking up half a mil without taking home any hardware would put him anywhere but with the rest of the bracelet-less group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know some places track cashes. Hellmuth has the all-time lead in that category with 50-something. Money won would be a way, but not always the best way because one first place victory could be worth more than Chad's 8 cashes combined. Even though, imo, cashing 8 times is more impressive.

 

Ask Jamie Gold if he would trade his 12 mil and bracelet for 8 cashes and he'll laugh you out of the room. That probably goes for 99% of players that have won a bracelet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 got paid because single draw 2-7 lowball is played with 7 per table. They decided to only pay the final table, since there were only 78 players. As for the payout structure, every casino has a payout formula. It changes from house to house, but in general it goes something like this: Roughly 10% of the total field makes the money, with 1st place getting between 25-35% of the total prize pool, and then decreasing along a curve.

 

I know that HArrah's (at least for the main event) flattened that payouts this year so that the top prizes are a bit less percentage wise and the lower prizes are a bit greater. IIRC, it worked out so that say the first level of cash last year was in the 18K range, this year it would be more in line with 25K or so. And the 12million first prize would have been closer to 10.25 million.

 

As Sheik said, typically it is top 10% get paid, 1st place getting 25-35% (generally decreases in percentage as the field gets larger).

 

 

On a separate albeit similar note, I have agreed to help a friend set up a charity poker tournament for his sister. It will basically be his regular gorup that we pull from and some of her friends/relatives etc.

 

Normally we have a $100 buy-in tourney every 4-6 weeks.

 

When he asked me my thoughts on the charity event, I said I thought that some form of rebuy/.add-on event would generate more money for the charity, so my thought was that we would have the regular $100 buy in (with $75 to the prize pool, $25 to charity) getting $10K in chips, and an optional, albeit highly encouraged $25 add-on getting an extra $15K in chips to start (was gonna do all $25 to charity, but these guys may not all be the most charitable type, so may make it a $10/$15 prize pool/charity split). Also, I was going to have at the end of the first hour another $25 add-on that would give another 15-25K in chips (not sure yet, could use input).

 

Here are the confines. We are anticipating 20-24 players, but a few less and even a few more are a possibility, so figure 3 tables to start. We have been asked to try plan it/set it up so that it would end at approx. 11pm. Start time most likely wont be until 7pm, though we are going ot try see if everyone can make it at 6pm. So, biggest challenge will be coming up with a structure that will give everyone plenty of play for their money, but end fairly close to the time frame. I could easily set up a structure with a flat 10K in chips that likely would end within 4 hours, but the add-on extra chips are throwing me a bit in determining this. I don't want this to become a complete crapshoot, at least not too early, but do need to respect the wishes of the host that we are done close to 11pm.

 

We are also planning to flatten our normal pay structure a bit and add a place or two to the payouts as this is for charity, to help keep it a more fun atmosphere. I am thinking that for 0-18 player, pay 4 spots, 19-23 pay 5 spots and 24 or more players pay 6 spots. Figure if we have 20 players, each taking at least one of the add-ons and we do the 10/15 split for them, we are looking at a prize pool of $1700 and $800 raised for the charity.

 

So, sheik and others, I welcome your input. I know that homepokertourney.com has some sections on structures, and will check them out tonight at home, but not sure that they address how to account for extra chips due to rebuys and add-ons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn't that make his 8th cash of this years World Series? And his 19th total at WS events? Seems like someone may be underestimating his ability just a bit :D

 

I have never seen anything in Chad Brown's game that impressed me. I don't respect him as a poker player. Bad players run good for years at a time. It happens often. In 15 years around poker rooms I've seen hundreds of guys run hot, build up a huge roll, walk around like they invented the game, and then leave town broke. Gus Hansen was the hottest player on the planet for about 2 years straight by playing like a straight up maniac. Now he's stuck millions of dollars in the big game. Watch Eli Elezra on High Stakes Poker. He makes drastic poker mistakes all the time in that game. He won a bracelet this year and was chip leader of the 50K HORSE event for 3 straight days. I won't judge a player's skill over 1 or 2 years. It's just not a big enough sample size.

 

There just aren't many guys like Chip Reese and Allen Cunningham. They are masters of the game. Chad Brown is hot, I grant you. But he's not in the elite league of poker players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ask Jamie Gold if he would trade his 12 mil and bracelet for 8 cashes and he'll laugh you out of the room. That probably goes for 99% of players that have won a bracelet.

 

Agreed. I said impressive. I didn't say I'd trade it. And we're talking about consistant good to great play over the course of many days, and the course of many different events. Having a bracelet doesn't make you a great player, it means you played a great tourney. Ask Chris Moneymaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, 8 cashes at this year's WSOp is nothing to sniff at.

 

Are there any standings kept to determine which individual player is having the best World Series? I understand that there are a number of different ways to measure this (total number of cashes, or something along the lines of what BC does for our pool, plus various others I'm sure) - I'd be interested in knowing which players are having the best WSOp overall...and I suspect that with 8 cashes that Chad Brown would be toward the top of that list.

 

Harrah's does a WSOP Player of the Year award. I believe Tom Schneider has pretty much locked it up (though there are a couple that I believe are mathematically within striking distance depending on the Main Event finish). Eric Lynch mentioned this in his blog on Card Player as he was one of the few that was keeping close until Tom won his 2nd bracelet (in addition to having a third final table appearance and I believe a couple other cashes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that HArrah's (at least for the main event) flattened that payouts this year so that the top prizes are a bit less percentage wise and the lower prizes are a bit greater. IIRC, it worked out so that say the first level of cash last year was in the 18K range, this year it would be more in line with 25K or so. And the 12million first prize would have been closer to 10.25 million.

 

As Sheik said, typically it is top 10% get paid, 1st place getting 25-35% (generally decreases in percentage as the field gets larger).

On a separate albeit similar note, I have agreed to help a friend set up a charity poker tournament for his sister. It will basically be his regular gorup that we pull from and some of her friends/relatives etc.

 

Normally we have a $100 buy-in tourney every 4-6 weeks.

 

When he asked me my thoughts on the charity event, I said I thought that some form of rebuy/.add-on event would generate more money for the charity, so my thought was that we would have the regular $100 buy in (with $75 to the prize pool, $25 to charity) getting $10K in chips, and an optional, albeit highly encouraged $25 add-on getting an extra $15K in chips to start (was gonna do all $25 to charity, but these guys may not all be the most charitable type, so may make it a $10/$15 prize pool/charity split). Also, I was going to have at the end of the first hour another $25 add-on that would give another 15-25K in chips (not sure yet, could use input).

 

Here are the confines. We are anticipating 20-24 players, but a few less and even a few more are a possibility, so figure 3 tables to start. We have been asked to try plan it/set it up so that it would end at approx. 11pm. Start time most likely wont be until 7pm, though we are going ot try see if everyone can make it at 6pm. So, biggest challenge will be coming up with a structure that will give everyone plenty of play for their money, but end fairly close to the time frame. I could easily set up a structure with a flat 10K in chips that likely would end within 4 hours, but the add-on extra chips are throwing me a bit in determining this. I don't want this to become a complete crapshoot, at least not too early, but do need to respect the wishes of the host that we are done close to 11pm.

 

We are also planning to flatten our normal pay structure a bit and add a place or two to the payouts as this is for charity, to help keep it a more fun atmosphere. I am thinking that for 0-18 player, pay 4 spots, 19-23 pay 5 spots and 24 or more players pay 6 spots. Figure if we have 20 players, each taking at least one of the add-ons and we do the 10/15 split for them, we are looking at a prize pool of $1700 and $800 raised for the charity.

 

So, sheik and others, I welcome your input. I know that homepokertourney.com has some sections on structures, and will check them out tonight at home, but not sure that they address how to account for extra chips due to rebuys and add-ons.

 

I didn't take the longest look at this (I'm actually headed out to play tonight), but it looks like if players take all the add-on's they could wind up with between 40 and 50 K in chips. . .be careful or you'll have a 20 hour tourney. With that many chips in play you'll need to have 10 minute levels at the most, and shouldn't even put out green chips to start. You'll need to start with the blinds at least 100/200. . .

 

Also, if you're really interested in making some money for your charity, there's nothing wrong with making it a straight 50/50. Many charity events pay that little to the winners. . .Half the point is just having fun playing and raising awareness for your cause.

 

I'll check it out more when I get home, hopefully up a few bills. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have never seen anything in Chad Brown's game that impressed me. I don't respect him as a poker player. Bad players run good for years at a time. It happens often. In 15 years around poker rooms I've seen hundreds of guys run hot, build up a huge roll, walk around like they invented the game, and then leave town broke. Gus Hansen was the hottest player on the planet for about 2 years straight by playing like a straight up maniac. Now he's stuck millions of dollars in the big game. Watch Eli Elezra on High Stakes Poker. He makes drastic poker mistakes all the time in that game. He won a bracelet this year and was chip leader of the 50K HORSE event for 3 straight days. I won't judge a player's skill over 1 or 2 years. It's just not a big enough sample size.

 

There just aren't many guys like Chip Reese and Allen Cunningham. They are masters of the game. Chad Brown is hot, I grant you. But he's not in the elite league of poker players.

 

Well said. Regarding Eli Elezra, I'm not sure if I call him a professional poker player though. He made his money with his businesses (and still does) and plays poker for entertainment (albeit potentially expensive or profitable entertainment). Yes, he strives to be the best he can, as I assume we all do, but it is not by any means his primary source of income (if it is even a source of income)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well said. Regarding Eli Elezra, I'm not sure if I call him a professional poker player though. He made his money with his businesses (and still does) and plays poker for entertainment (albeit potentially expensive or profitable entertainment). Yes, he strives to be the best he can, as I assume we all do, but it is not by any means his primary source of income (if it is even a source of income)

 

If Allen Cunningham had never won a hand of poker, he never would have needed to work a day in his life. He comes from an uber-rich family. He's still one of the 5 greatest living poker players.

 

You should ask Eli if he considers himself an elite poker player. . .I'd bet you any amount he would say yes.

 

Donk!

 

OK, off to hit the felt. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.