|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 9/7/2008 8:00:52 PM PACIFIC |
 Show #3 of WPT- comments, Easy E, 9. Apr 2003 21:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I missed a fair amount of the WPT last night- the beginning, much of the middle. Here are my comments on what I saw: Amateur/Pro split format- I didn't pick up on that until later- interesting. Did the amateurs also win $250K, and then the only prize from heads-up was the WPT seat token? If you had a choice, which path would you have taken, if you were a pro? Pro side, even with supposedly tougher field, since you know more about the players? Or amateur side, trading knowledge for presumed weaker average skill level? Announcers- Guys, time for the WPT polos to be debuted! ;) Actually, the florals weren't that bad- I guess they were going with the theme... Kathy Liebert- one sentence- SLOW DOWN AGAINST BIGGER STACKS EARLY ON! Actually, I don't know how far the pro section was along in their semi-final table, and evidently she sensed some weakness, but I can't believe that she wanted to be called, until she saw his hand... and then he got lucky anyway. I know the blinds were pretty high for the stacks, maybe that was part of her move? I wondered if, instead of going all-in preflop, she had waited for the Q catch on the flop to push in, would she have won the hand? And how in the HECK did she get into the Amateur side of this tournament? What the heck are the standards for being a pro now? PROS- either they were trying for some unusual trap plays, or some of them believe in luck just a LITTLE more than they should. I think Jen H misplayed her Aces against PH... I'm sure she thinks that also (ahhh.... the ease of the armchair quarterback in making pronouncements...) Speaking of which, it might be interesting to see one of the players involved (pro or otherwise) talk through some of their actions, from the tapes of the past tournaments. I wonder how many of them would say, "I was an IDIOT!"? Scotty was making jokes about it, wonder what he REALLY felt? Did I hear incorrectly, or did Phil lie to Jen H about his hand, when he studied and studied and dumped it finally? He said AJ, but he had Ax, didn't he? Does Phil expect that to affect Jen's play during the tournament, since he has to know that she'll be able to 'look him up' on the replay? HEADS UP- I'm assuming that we didn't see a lot of poker being played, but the Fin looked as cool as a cucumber and played like the real pro at the table. Was it me, or did Phil Gordon either have a problem with: a) his ego vs. an 'amateur', as far as his ability to outplay him post-flop b) Fancy Play Syndrome (if that's the right term to use here) Unless there was something huge that we missed offcamera, it sure seemed like Phil was determined to 'outplay' the 'inferior' opponent.. at the cost of many of his chips. The Fin seemed to be getting a lot of decent hands for heads up, while Phil was throwing chips around on crap (I assume with the hope of trapping the Fin with a good flop). Phil seems a little too locked into his concept of play for that match. LAST HAND- Do you reraise all-in with 55 here? I don't think there's any question about calling the small all-in with AJ. Good stuff! I saw the 2002 WSOP show soon after WPT at the Bicycle- the difference in quality of the presentation (from a poker addict's point of view) was VERY obvious! Looking forward to next Wednesday! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, Jeffrey Biship, 9. Apr 2003 21:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 9. Apr 2003 21:15 Easy E wrote: > Amateur/Pro split format- I didn't pick up on that until later- interesting. > Did the amateurs also win $250K, and then the only prize from heads-up was the > WPT seat token? I was wondering that, too. I feel like they didn't make it very clear. My understanding was that the amateur basically won the shot to play the pro. Not a very good prize, IMO, though Juha certainly made the most of it. > If you had a choice, which path would you have taken, if you were a pro? Well, the pros really didn't have a choice. The pros were invited by UB. There was much controversy about this on RGP, as you may remember.... > And how in the HECK did she get into the Amateur side of this tournament? > What the heck are the standards for being a pro now? That seemed a little unseemly to me, though I guess anyone who could win an online qualifier could go. Her presence at the amateur table along with the fact that the amateurs seemed to get a bad deal compared to the pros, along with the fact that two FRIENDS made it to the final table, AND Phil Gordon calls his opponent a "card rack".... Well, maybe I'm cynical, but this show wasn't the best episode from a "for the good of the game" perspective. I hear next week John Corbett wins the final table all blows the whole wad on hookers and craps! :) > PROS- either they were trying for some unusual trap plays, or some of them > believe in luck just a LITTLE more than they should. > I think Jen H misplayed her Aces against PH... I'm sure she thinks that also > (ahhh.... the ease of the armchair quarterback in making pronouncements...) I kind of thought the pros were a little over the top in the "reverse tell" department. Jen H. was squirming and signing and frowning so much, I thought she was having a seizure. > Speaking of which, it might be interesting to see one of the players > involved (pro or otherwise) talk through some of their actions, from the tapes > of the past tournaments. I wonder how many of them would say, "I was an > IDIOT!"? Scotty was making jokes about it, wonder what he REALLY felt? Scotty's interview made me squirm a bit. I don't think he was joking. I think he was in pain, realized he said too much, and tried to cover. But that's just me. > Unless there was something huge that we missed offcamera, it sure seemed > like Phil was determined to 'outplay' the 'inferior' opponent.. at the cost of > many of his chips. > The Fin seemed to be getting a lot of decent hands for heads up, while > Phil was throwing chips around on crap (I assume with the hope of trapping the > Fin with a good flop). Phil seems a little too locked into his concept of play > for that match. Yeah, Phil seemed determined to outplay his opponent and ended up outplaying himself, IMO. He regained his composure at the end and actually appeared gracious in defeat, but he was getting a little surely there for a while. Not pretty. Is it just me, or does anyone else find Shauna Hiatt kind of wooden and more of a liability than a benefit? I mean, she's pretty and all, but I really disliked her interviewing the exiting players. She should stick to the side segments, IMO. Jeff | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| I answered this same post on RGP, Jeff, Easy E, 10. Apr 2003 06:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| n/m | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, gary ford, 10. Apr 2003 00:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 9. Apr 2003 21:15 Easy E wrote: > I missed a fair amount of the WPT last night- the beginning, much of the middle. > Here are my comments on what I saw: > > Amateur/Pro split format- I didn't pick up on that until later- interesting. > Did the amateurs also win $250K, and then the only prize from heads-up was the > WPT seat token? > If you had a choice, which path would you have taken, if you were a pro? > Pro side, even with supposedly tougher field, since you know more about the > players? Or amateur side, trading knowledge for presumed weaker average skill > level? > > Announcers- Guys, time for the WPT polos to be debuted! ;) Actually, the > florals weren't that bad- I guess they were going with the theme... > > Kathy Liebert- one sentence- SLOW DOWN AGAINST BIGGER STACKS EARLY ON! > Actually, I don't know how far the pro section was along in their semi-final > table, and evidently she sensed some weakness, but I can't believe that she > wanted to be called, until she saw his hand... and then he got lucky anyway. I > know the blinds were pretty high for the stacks, maybe that was part of her > move? > I wondered if, instead of going all-in preflop, she had waited for the Q > catch on the flop to push in, would she have won the hand? > And how in the HECK did she get into the Amateur side of this tournament? > What the heck are the standards for being a pro now? > > PROS- either they were trying for some unusual trap plays, or some of them > believe in luck just a LITTLE more than they should. > I think Jen H misplayed her Aces against PH... I'm sure she thinks that also > (ahhh.... the ease of the armchair quarterback in making pronouncements...) > Speaking of which, it might be interesting to see one of the players > involved (pro or otherwise) talk through some of their actions, from the tapes > of the past tournaments. I wonder how many of them would say, "I was an > IDIOT!"? Scotty was making jokes about it, wonder what he REALLY felt? > Did I hear incorrectly, or did Phil lie to Jen H about his hand, when he > studied and studied and dumped it finally? He said AJ, but he had Ax, didn't > he? Does Phil expect that to affect Jen's play during the tournament, since he > has to know that she'll be able to 'look him up' on the replay? > > HEADS UP- I'm assuming that we didn't see a lot of poker being played, but > the Fin looked as cool as a cucumber and played like the real pro at the > table. > Was it me, or did Phil Gordon either have a problem with: > a) his ego vs. an 'amateur', as far as his ability to outplay him > post-flop > b) Fancy Play Syndrome (if that's the right term to use here) > > Unless there was something huge that we missed offcamera, it sure seemed > like Phil was determined to 'outplay' the 'inferior' opponent.. at the cost of > many of his chips. > The Fin seemed to be getting a lot of decent hands for heads up, while > Phil was throwing chips around on crap (I assume with the hope of trapping the > Fin with a good flop). Phil seems a little too locked into his concept of play > for that match. > > LAST HAND- Do you reraise all-in with 55 here? I don't think there's any > question about calling the small all-in with AJ. > > Good stuff! I saw the 2002 WSOP show soon after WPT at the Bicycle- the > difference in quality of the presentation (from a poker addict's point of view) > was VERY obvious! > ,,,,,,> Looking forward to next Wednesday! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, gary ford, 10. Apr 2003 00:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The play got very wierd when phil g started that series of bluffs. Since the show is taped with many hands left out, whats the rush? Same for kathy again--she must hate being on TV. The setting was beautiful, who would have thought a major poker tournament would have been played outdoors? 2 hours is awfully long for any tv show especially a poker one. I felt the show dragged a lot and Mike Sexton wasn't up to par. Too many of the same comments. Beats the hell out of "Lucky " though. on to the next one------ | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, shorn, 10. Apr 2003 05:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Apr 2003 00:31 gary ford wrote: > The play got very wierd when phil g started that series of bluffs. Since the show is taped > with many hands left out, whats the rush? Same for kathy again--she must hate being on TV. > The setting was beautiful, who would have thought a major poker tournament would have been > played outdoors? 2 hours is awfully long for any tv show especially a poker one. I felt > the show dragged a lot and Mike Sexton wasn't up to par. Too many of the same comments. > Beats the hell out of "Lucky " though. > > on to the next one------ I had understood that there were 8 pro's invited in total to this one with the winner getting $250K + the chance to play the amateur for the $25k seat (like this mattered after winning 10 times that amount). The amateur winner won $50k + the chance to play the pro for the seat. The part that bugged me most was when the one Finn checked his flush on the river and it was checked around...I smelled something fishy there between the two Finns. As for Phil G.'s play, it looked to me like he thought he could run over the amateur and he was wrong. He didn't get good cards and played them too hard. However, the amateur played pretty loosey-goosey too especially calling all-in bets from other players with marginal hands that hit. I guess we all have days when the board bails us out on bad decisions... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, Easy E, 10. Apr 2003 06:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I didn't see all of the show- was he leading in chips most of the times that he pulled that? Did the bets potentially threaten most of his stack? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Show #3 of WPT- comments, shorn, 10. Apr 2003 06:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| No. He was behind the amateur from the get-go but it should have been pretty obvious that this guy wasn't intimidated in the slightest by the situation (where he would lay down a hand that was better). Every time Phil raised he was re-raised by the guy. Anyway, when you make a big raise pre-flop and on the flop with 62o, you are either on tilt or you don't know what the f you are doing. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| sorry, should have been clearer, Easy E, 10. Apr 2003 07:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was questioning THIS statement, not Phil's play "However, the amateur played pretty loosey-goosey too especially calling all-in bets from other players with marginal hands that hit." So, to repeat my questions: 1) I didn't see all of the show- was he leading in chips most of the times that he pulled that? 2) Did the bets potentially threaten most of his stack? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: sorry, should have been clearer, shorn, 10. Apr 2003 07:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Apr 2003 07:30 Easy E wrote: > I was questioning THIS statement, not Phil's play > "However, the amateur played pretty loosey-goosey too especially calling all-in bets from other players with > marginal hands that hit." > > So, to repeat my questions: > 1) I didn't see all of the show- was he leading in chips most of the times that he pulled that? Yes, but calling an all-in raise from a Kathy Liebert with 97 off doesn't make sense unless her all-in is something like twice the BB. > > 2) Did the bets potentially threaten most of his stack? They threatened enough in my opinion to not make all the calls. Hey, I'm not saying the guy didn't play well in spots (in fact, he looked like he had a stone cold read oh Phil in the final), but some of his plays were really over the top. Maybe my criticism is why I m a crappy NL player because I wouldn't have the stones to make some of those plays. Basically, he played super aggressive and the deck ran him over when he needed it to. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| thanks, I didn't see all of that, Easy E, 10. Apr 2003 07:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| guess I'll have to catch the rerun show. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Screw the poker critique, How bout Shana in the swimsuit!!!!, Chad, 10. Apr 2003 11:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| BOING!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL Didn't get to catch much of the show, will try and catch the rerun on Saturday, but I did get to see Shana walking off the beach at the end. DUDUDUDU HEWOOA SHANA!!!!! If I ever get that far in one of the tourneys I would tell them to keep their money I ll take Shana. LOL That young lady is an absolute 10. Now, how about a "strip poker" tourney with her as the short stack at the final table? Wait, what am I saying then we might have to see Phil Hellmuth's body of a god, Buddha that is. LOL Just Kidding guys, hope the show makes it. Chad | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|