I don't know why everyone is getting bent out of shape, the two players who SHOULD win are obvious, Sparce or Nutter, all the other players are simply window dressing to fill out the weeks. If it's for the WSOP Nutter is the obvious winner, if it was for a cash game at the Bellagio it's clearly Sparce.
Phil went out because he could never win, he was going sooner or later so why not now. Dohhh, i don't get it myself, but he's going soon anyway, so why get upset.
The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge. Having said that the river cards on here are remarkable, so the chances are someone with only a 4% chance of winning will probably emerge victorious, so Glitterbabe still has a chance.
I don't know why everyone is getting bent out of shape, the two players who SHOULD win are obvious, Sparce or Nutter, all the other players are simply window dressing to fill out the weeks. If it's for the WSOP Nutter is the obvious winner, if it was for a cash game at the Bellagio it's clearly Sparce. Phil went out because he could never win, he was going sooner or later so why not now. Dohhh, i don't get it myself, but he's going soon anyway, so why get upset. The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge. Having said that the river cards on here are remarkable, so the chances are someone with only a 4% chance of winning will probably emerge victorious, so Glitterbabe still has a chance. I too give my post a 4% chance of staying up. Posted by stien
I'll take those odds. Your post will not be taken down.
I don't know why everyone is getting bent out of shape, the two players who SHOULD win are obvious, Sparce or Nutter, all the other players are simply window dressing to fill out the weeks. If it's for the WSOP Nutter is the obvious winner, if it was for a cash game at the Bellagio it's clearly Sparce. Phil went out because he could never win, he was going sooner or later so why not now. Dohhh, i don't get it myself, but he's going soon anyway, so why get upset. The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge. Having said that the river cards on here are remarkable, so the chances are someone with only a 4% chance of winning will probably emerge victorious, so Glitterbabe still has a chance. I too give my post a 4% chance of staying up. Posted by stien
Who made you the fount of all poker wisdom? How on earth would you know what a total player is capable of, their strengths and weaknesses or their different skill sets? What gives you the right to even comment? Everybody who has made it this far in this competition had done so on their own merit and they don't need some random jealous forum troll to come and tell them otherwise!
"The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge."
This made me laugh. What makes you think that you are qualified to make this statement? I can tell you from my own experience of playing with shark, of which I'm sure you have very little, that she is a highly competent poker player and there is certainly no 'gap' that she needs to bridge
Nice to see that you have used your huge forum contribution of 14, to come and criticize others! Well I will give you some advice: it is usually those that are unduly critical of others that often need to look at themselves and give themselves a critical appraisal.
I hope the post number 15 is a much nicer one. Perhaps if you show some more class in future you might make a few more friends around here.
Really enjoyed the show last night. (Watching it with the sound off obv helped ).
The sit n go's were a great idea, and made for good viewing.
However, they shouldn't be overplayed as to working out who is the best player.
Even the best single table players go on runs of multiple games without cashing - 2 games mean next to nothing.
I feel very much for Phil.
His game seems a good, solid, one, and it is obvious he has worked very hard for this competition.
He has also delivered some very consistent results, and has every right to feel gutted at not being in the next phase. (Given he is a teacher, at least he will have lots of time to mull it over in the days coming ) ).
The difficulty is this, if you don't make the decision results orientated (and I am not saying it should be), then you are comparing apples and pears, and the final decisions will always leave the potential for debate and disagreement.
I sincerely hope that the contest, and the 'election' of a winner at the end of it, is not overshadowed by controversy. It simply demeans the effort that these players are putting in to delivering us an excellent contest.
This looks to me like a personal vendetta Browndog. I posted MY opinion. I didn't slate shark I simply gave MY opinion that I believe Sparce is a better player and there is in My opinion a skill gap. As for making friends on here, I don't need any more friends thanks, that was never my intention.
'What gives you the right to even comment?' It's a forum for discussion is it not?
Come on Browndog, who made you the voice of TP? I don't post often because I rarely feel the need to and your personal attack makes me feel vindicated in this. As for your advice, thanks but I'll stick to listening to those that I pay to listen to. And before you demand it, yawn, no I don't want to play you HU.
I guess you are still fizzing over the hand i posted a couple of weeks back, there were a few on here that found it hilarious. As I've said before I do not think i'm a great player, i'm simply another player trying to improve, so please stop with the "jealous forum troll" it makes you sound like Gordon Brown.
Last week and last night was especially difficult and I feel for everyone who was eliminated. Unfortunately, cuts had to be made and I had the unenviable task of doing just that.
The first week, we had a bit more time to 'mentor' the players and I must say I quite enjoyed that aspect of this competition. Last week was a bit different as each of the remaining 9 players only got about an hour of time with their respective mentors. I would have loved to give each of my players a few more hours, but knowing I wouldn't be able to, I had to make the difficult decision to be more of a judge last week. All of my players know what parts of their games I wanted them to work on and they were all doing just that with flying colors. I didn't think it would be fair to 'help' one player knowing we didn't have the time to help all of them.
As for Phil, I can understand why you must be frustrated and disappointed. I meant what I said last night that I think my three are better than anyone else in this competition. That being said, one of you had to go. It wasn't an easy choice.
I think you are a great player Phil and I hope you go on to win tourney after tourney, ending up with a WSOP bracelet around your wrist. Go ahead and do your best to make me feel like I made the wrong decision.
I had a wonderful time working with you and I hope we can continue in the future.
All the best to everyone involved in TP - while this has been a lot of fun and very rewarding, it's also proving to be very difficult.
I don't know why everyone is getting bent out of shape, the two players who SHOULD win are obvious, Sparce or Nutter, all the other players are simply window dressing to fill out the weeks. If it's for the WSOP Nutter is the obvious winner, if it was for a cash game at the Bellagio it's clearly Sparce. Phil went out because he could never win, he was going sooner or later so why not now. Dohhh, i don't get it myself, but he's going soon anyway, so why get upset. The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge. Having said that the river cards on here are remarkable, so the chances are someone with only a 4% chance of winning will probably emerge victorious, so Glitterbabe still has a chance. I too give my post a 4% chance of staying up. Posted by stien
I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree. Being relatively new to Sky Poker, I had no preconceived notions about any of the players. In fact, one of my players told me that James is the best player on Sky and he's no longer in the competition. As for my players, I chatted with them, looked over many, many hands they played. I did my best to mentor when I could and at the end of the day I had to make a judgement call on who I think would be the best candidate to be the Total Player. I'm not really very familar with any of the players on this site yet, but I'll tell you...I flip-flopped on Dohhh and Phil for the past week and didn't actually make up my mind until I looked over a series of hands yesterday afternoon. As for who will be my 'One' - both players are qualified and no decision is even remotely close to being made yet. I've got some time with them this week and I'm looking forward to every minute.
As for Phil, once again, I can only imagine how frustrated you are, but I do consider you a friend and if you'd like to, I'd love to continue helping you hone your game. No decision was made until yesterday and really there was nothing you did wrong. You were just up against very tough competition. To be honest, I'd be proud to have any of the three of you representing me and Sky Poker.
Last week and last night was especially difficult and I feel for everyone who was eliminated. Unfortunately, cuts had to be made and I had the unenviable task of doing just that. The first week, we had a bit more time to 'mentor' the players and I must say I quite enjoyed that aspect of this competition. Last week was a bit different as each of the remaining 9 players only got about an hour of time with their respective mentors. I would have loved to give each of my players a few more hours, but knowing I wouldn't be able to, I had to make the difficult decision to be more of a judge last week. All of my players know what parts of their games I wanted them to work on and they were all doing just that with flying colors. I didn't think it would be fair to 'help' one player knowing we didn't have the time to help all of them. As for Phil, I can understand why you must be frustrated and disappointed. I meant what I said last night that I think my three are better than anyone else in this competition. That being said, one of you had to go. It wasn't an easy choice. I think you are a great player Phil and I hope you go on to win tourney after tourney, ending up with a WSOP bracelet around your wrist. Go ahead and do your best to make me feel like I made the wrong decision. I had a wonderful time working with you and I hope we can continue in the future. All the best to everyone involved in TP - while this has been a lot of fun and very rewarding, it's also proving to be very difficult. uPosted by DAVID_T
you say u wud not be able to give ur time so why did u say yes to be a mentor? and like you say you became a judge do yourself think it is fare to do that to ppl why did u not do wat mb did and get some1 else to help u out . its soooo wrong wat uve said and done . del
In Response to Re: OFFICIAL TOTAL PLAYER THREAD : you say u wud not be able to give ur time so why did u say yes to be a mentor? and like you say you became a judge do yourself think it is fare to do that to ppl why did u not do wat mb did and get some1 else to help u out . its soooo wrong wat uve said and done . del Posted by DELTA
You are reading things into the post that were not stated. David said that EACH of the players only got an allotted amount of time. Why do you think that David's availabilty impacted on the allotted time for the 6 players supervised by the other mentors??? Also, Tikay stood in to supervise Matt's players on one evening due to Matt's unfortunate circumstances - I don't believe that he mentored them. David had a very difficult decision and I, for one, do not envy him his role. He would have access to all the hands that were played by his candidates plus his correspondence with them on which to base his decision. It is a bit "off" for you to be criticising his actions on this thread, imo.
Im gonna come to the defence of David now, not because I'm through, or I want to get in his good books, just because it's the way I see it.
(and I said this live on the show last night too when I thought I was on my way out, so it's not boot licking)
The time David and I spent talking throughout the 2 stages of bootcamp, was invaluable. This time round, each mentor was online for only 1 night, which restricted them to around about an hour focussing solely on 1 player. (Im not sure how the other mentors allocated time, but David chose to watch us individually for a prolonged period)
The quality and intensity of these sessions was huge. Every single hand I played, was given to David, even 72 off utg. Playing 2 tables at once, this got abit messy, especially when I as involved in 2 pots at once, but every hand was noted, and discussed, and the ones which overlapped, were looked at afterwards. As well as this, hands played on my own account were discussed, as well as hypothetical scenarios, and general poker strategy.
I feel in the time we had to discuss poker, we squeezed in as much theory and hand analysis as possible, the buzzer on m s n was constantly going! In fact I was timed out on 7/8 occasions as I was so into the conversation, and quite often, strong debate!
I agree with Phil, more time would have been great, but the quality of the advice was what was important to me, I think the balance between learning new things and putting these new moves into practise was spot on - and all 3 groups had their mentor online for the same amount of time.
In Response to Re: OFFICIAL TOTAL PLAYER THREAD : you say u wud not be able to give ur time so why did u say yes to be a mentor? and like you say you became a judge do yourself think it is fare to do that to ppl why did u not do wat mb did and get some1 else to help u out . its soooo wrong wat uve said and done . del Posted by DELTA
I made it wholly clear on this Thread, numerous times, before & after, that on the night I "stood in" for Matt, I would not & did not Mentor any of his players, because that would be wholly improper. All his players, as of then & now, will confirm this, 100%.
I said I would - & I did - simply rail them, & act as a messenger boy, a "sponge man," in Matt's absence, a conduit for info really. In fact, Matt "took over" from me towards the end of that evening, & I continued to Rail the TP-ers that night, as I have Railed most of them, on most nights, throughout.
Recovered from the night before and caught up on the threads.
Delighted to get through and once again the desire to win increases further. Unlucky to Phil, yip and James but keep faith in your own ability and you will come out the stronger . Luton is going to be INTENSE and i look forward to played alot of poker over their !
I have personal disappointment that my friend Phil and new mate James didn't get through. As in any singular competition the winner isn't necessarily the 'best', many times professional sportsmen have come from losing in semi-finals and then gone on to become stronger and better competitors. I know that James will take this in his stride and Phil will have now improved his game even further - taking him to the level where a WSOP shot is easily attainable.
There will always be analysis over the fairness of judgements when there are subjective elements involved in the decision making process. The forum is a great place to air these opinions and it is interesting to read.
I don't claim to be a good poker player, I don't play at massive buy in levels, but I do enjoy our hobby/interest.. and this concept is good entertainment and it has certainly been a success in my eyes.
Like any new format (think pop idol/Xfactor) there will be changes over teh coming seasons, tinkering to perfect the formula, but for the first season this has gone well.
Would like to say Well done to the guys and gal that went through and very unlucky to the guys that didnt get through. Reading through all the posts, I just would like to say as a keen beginner (ish) this programme has been a great insight to me, I enjoy it every week and think it has helped my own game. I find it really sad that dohhh has been on the receiving end of criticism when really he should be celebrating getting through. I hope he rises above it.
I really would like to see Sharksbite win this however!
Comments
Phil went out because he could never win, he was going sooner or later so why not now. Dohhh, i don't get it myself, but he's going soon anyway, so why get upset.
The only true wildcard for me is shark but the skill difference is too wide for her to bridge. Having said that the river cards on here are remarkable, so the chances are someone with only a 4% chance of winning will probably emerge victorious, so Glitterbabe still has a chance.
I too give my post a 4% chance of staying up.
This looks to me like a personal vendetta Browndog. I posted MY opinion. I didn't slate shark I simply gave MY opinion that I believe Sparce is a better player and there is in My opinion a skill gap. As for making friends on here, I don't need any more friends thanks, that was never my intention.
'What gives you the right to even comment?' It's a forum for discussion is it not?
Come on Browndog, who made you the voice of TP? I don't post often because I rarely feel the need to and your personal attack makes me feel vindicated in this. As for your advice, thanks but I'll stick to listening to those that I pay to listen to. And before you demand it, yawn, no I don't want to play you HU.
I guess you are still fizzing over the hand i posted a couple of weeks back, there were a few on here that found it hilarious. As I've said before I do not think i'm a great player, i'm simply another player trying to improve, so please stop with the "jealous forum troll" it makes you sound like Gordon Brown.
The first week, we had a bit more time to 'mentor' the players and I must say I quite enjoyed that aspect of this competition. Last week was a bit different as each of the remaining 9 players only got about an hour of time with their respective mentors. I would have loved to give each of my players a few more hours, but knowing I wouldn't be able to, I had to make the difficult decision to be more of a judge last week. All of my players know what parts of their games I wanted them to work on and they were all doing just that with flying colors. I didn't think it would be fair to 'help' one player knowing we didn't have the time to help all of them.
As for Phil, I can understand why you must be frustrated and disappointed. I meant what I said last night that I think my three are better than anyone else in this competition. That being said, one of you had to go. It wasn't an easy choice.
I think you are a great player Phil and I hope you go on to win tourney after tourney, ending up with a WSOP bracelet around your wrist. Go ahead and do your best to make me feel like I made the wrong decision.
I had a wonderful time working with you and I hope we can continue in the future.
All the best to everyone involved in TP - while this has been a lot of fun and very rewarding, it's also proving to be very difficult.
I respect your opinion, but I have to disagree. Being relatively new to Sky Poker, I had no preconceived notions about any of the players. In fact, one of my players told me that James is the best player on Sky and he's no longer in the competition. As for my players, I chatted with them, looked over many, many hands they played. I did my best to mentor when I could and at the end of the day I had to make a judgement call on who I think would be the best candidate to be the Total Player. I'm not really very familar with any of the players on this site yet, but I'll tell you...I flip-flopped on Dohhh and Phil for the past week and didn't actually make up my mind until I looked over a series of hands yesterday afternoon. As for who will be my 'One' - both players are qualified and no decision is even remotely close to being made yet. I've got some time with them this week and I'm looking forward to every minute.
As for Phil, once again, I can only imagine how frustrated you are, but I do consider you a friend and if you'd like to, I'd love to continue helping you hone your game. No decision was made until yesterday and really there was nothing you did wrong. You were just up against very tough competition. To be honest, I'd be proud to have any of the three of you representing me and Sky Poker.
David said that EACH of the players only got an allotted amount of time.
Why do you think that David's availabilty impacted on the allotted time for the 6 players supervised by the other mentors???
Also, Tikay stood in to supervise Matt's players on one evening due to Matt's unfortunate circumstances - I don't believe that he mentored them.
David had a very difficult decision and I, for one, do not envy him his role.
He would have access to all the hands that were played by his candidates plus his correspondence with them on which to base his decision.
It is a bit "off" for you to be criticising his actions on this thread, imo.
I said I would - & I did - simply rail them, & act as a messenger boy, a "sponge man," in Matt's absence, a conduit for info really. In fact, Matt "took over" from me towards the end of that evening, & I continued to Rail the TP-ers that night, as I have Railed most of them, on most nights, throughout.
I really would like to see Sharksbite win this however!