i agree yb. Tikay why do you not see him wibnnimg another one. Ok i dont see him winning the main event but maybe a side braclet event /> Posted by The_Don90
In NLHE, I don't think he'll win another, though that's not to say I hope he will or won't.
Why?
1) Field sizes have increased dramatically, so greater variance ensues. NLHE WSOP Events used to have a few hundred runners, they have many thousands now.
2) The game has changed, as the value of money, & respect for it, has diminished. Calling for your life with (say) 7-7when staked or backed by someone else, as is now common practice, is easy, so the game is tougher.
There are still plenty of "soft" Bracelets in non NLHE games. "Soft" because the field sizes are much smaller, but crucially, the skill Level in many Variants is clearly far far higher than shove & hope NLHE. So he may grab a few of them, but thus far, he's shown no aptitude for anything except NLHE.
DOHHHH's point may be that his game is now outdated, & his time has passed. He may well be right, too. But we can't disrespect the game of a guy who has won more Bangles than anyone else. And if he offered you or me a free lesson, we'd bite his hand off.
Madness! - goes a long way to explaining why he hasn't got anywhere in the ME for ages. Its the world championship of poker, it happens once a year and he can't even be bothered to turn up on time. For someone who claims to be the best player ever, this is just stooooooopid. And why the hek wud u not want to play against the fish? Especially when he gets owned so bad against the good/very good players. He is "the best player in the world" if he can't resist the temptation of limping in (ie - can't control what he does with his chips) then he's struggling! If ur gonna play a deepstack on sky poker, and not even start playing until it becomes a normal stacked game, you might as well play the open? - you can have the deepstack table open and have chatbox conversation for free- save ur buy in. Surely someone agrees with me here? Posted by DOHHHHHHH
I think most people can look at both sides of the argument it's just that you will not listen to the reasoning behind entering late - You have a 30K stack, plenty of play and no need to get busy early on - you seem to think that it would be easy to not limp in with speculative hands - try it - those small suited connectors look lovely when you see a table full of players limping in!! How do you play AA in the first level? Raise x3BB 5BB 10BB? - No matter what it would go limp limp limp limp etc RAISE call call call call etc. If he turned up on the 2nd day late then obviously that is a different thing!!
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : Yes! I would not have said it otherwise. The likely reward vs the likely gain (from getting involved early) is the equation you need to assess. I know some players who have never even addressed or even considered that equation! Go figure. I have no issue if others disagree, it's each to their own. I assume by "put pressure on other players (using your bigger stack) means pressing with a wider range of hands......It may surprise you to know that some of the more wily players have worked that out. Broad as it's long, see? Posted by Tikay10
Lol I seem to remember a deepstack when you kept completing from the sb then re-raising whenever I raised from the bb
You're right though its just best to do what you feel most comfortable with, I play cash games mostly and normally play quite laggy so got used to playing with a wide range pretty deep. But saying that in the wsop ME I would probably turn into a super nit for fear of shooting myself if I donked out early!
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : In NLHE, I don't think he'll win another, though that's not to say I hope he will or won't. Why? 1) Field sizes have increased dramatically, so greater variance ensues. NLHE WSOP Events used to have a few hundred runners, they have many thousands now. 2) The game has changed, as the value of money, & respect for it, has diminished. Calling for your life with (say) 7-7when staked or backed by someone else, as is now common practice, is easy, so the game is tougher. There are still plenty of "soft" Bracelets in non NLHE games. "Soft" because the field sizes are much smaller, but crucially, the skill Level in many Variants is clearly far far higher than shove & hope NLHE. So he may grab a few of them, but thus far, he's shown no aptitude for anything except NLHE. DOHHHH's point may be that his game is now outdated, & his time has passed. He may well be right, too. But we can't disrespect the game of a guy who has won more Bangles than anyone else. And if he offered you or me a free lesson, we'd bite his hand off. Posted by Tikay10
Didnt one of last years november 9 approach him for lessons?
And i see. I understand you point fully. Maybe next yearSky could build up a team for these side events Tikay? see if any of us could compete?
Some point during the first hour, there could be a limped pot with PH in the big blind with 4-5 off.
The flop cud come 4 4 4
And he wudnt be there to win any chips.
You can give me all the stats in the world, but being absent here, and missing out on lots of chips, definitely makes him less likely to win the event, than if he was there.
Course it's possible to win if u turn up late, but it's less likely than if you turn up on time.
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : Didnt one of last years november 9 approach him for lessons? And i see. I understand you point fully. Maybe next yearSky could build up a team for these side events Tikay? see if any of us could compete? Posted by The_Don90
Yes, Hellmuth was part of Team Shulman.
Phil's contribution? He recommended Jeff open for 4x with marginal hands, instead of the standard 2.2x raise, because, to quote Mr Hellmuth, "it makes it much harder for your opponents to three-bet you."
So, at the final table, Jeff regularly opened for 4x. And he got three-bet. And he folded.
Jeff's stack took a significant blow due to the Hellmuth strategy. I've spoken to a couple of other pros were who part of Team Schulman. Both said they'd rather Phil hadn't been involved!
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : Lol I seem to remember a deepstack when you kept completing from the sb then re-raising whenever I raised from the bb You're right though its just best to do what you feel most comfortable with, I play cash games mostly and normally play quite laggy so got used to playing with a wide range pretty deep. But saying that in the wsop ME I would probably turn into a super nit for fear of shooting myself if I donked out early! Posted by yb
Exactly - I rest my case.
You had a lot of chips, AND Position on me, & I knew what you were doing. So I limp-raised you frequently, because I know how players get early chips, & what players who get "early chips" do with them! You were "pressing" with air, & I was back-raising with air. I'd do it to ANY Tourney player who had early chips, never mind one who was as excellent as you.
Early chips align with a saying in life. Easy come, easy go. I LOVE players on my Table who have early chips.
Now & then - every 7 years on average - I'll get an AA v KK Double-Up early doors, so I then have to sit-out even longer.
"Modern" players disagree with this, which is fine by me. But they cannot say it's wrong, because they don't actually know. It's just a different way of approaching the game. Some might say - don't all get cross with me, please - it's a "thinking" approach.......
I can see where phil hellmuth comes from and tikay, in a tournament I prefer starting slow and getting busier when the blinds are higher, so often you see players run good for the first few levels then go card dead and not even make the final table, the first few levels are a recipe for disaster in deepstack tournaments with no raise being respected
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : You may not understand it, but that does not make it "ridiculous" JJ. MANY players do the same thing, for the simple & inescapable logic that you CANNOT win a Tourney in the early Levels, nor can you materially improve your chances of doing so. But you can lose it. Late in a well-structured Tourney, the BB often exceeds the starting stack, so an early 2xUp or 3xUp is almost irrelevant, & that's a well-known & accepted notion amongst Tourney players. You can mock Mr Hellmuth all you want, but his "method" has won him 11 WSOP Bracelets, ALL of them in NLHE. I personally doubt he'll ever win another, but we can't (logically) say he does not know what he is doing. Posted by Tikay10
You do rather state the obvious about winning!!!,but it seems that the good/skilful players ( yourself included ) have a philosphy that denigrates the first 3 levels???,as though they are only for bad/unskilful players. If everyone who plays 'holdem' were to have that same view ( now that you have let the cat out of the bag ) there would be no point in having any levels at all!!!,a little confusing old chap don't you think?. Kind regards
I tend to think that Phil Hellmuths late arrival has more to do with his wish to make a grand entrance rather than any tactical considerations.
Although I appreciate Tikays comment that a tourny can be lost but not won in the early stages, I hate to miss any of the early action.
I think it is invaluable to at least be at the table to assess the opposition and select a target for later on. Just by being there folding hands, you are also creating your own table image.
And personally I do prefer to try and pick up a few chips, to keep my stack above the average for the table. But there is little value in playing marginal hands and button raising any unraised pot, because the blinds are so low, the risk is usually greater than the reward.
The question is at what stage do you change gear and start playing more aggressive poker?
To me, in a well structured tourny, with a starting stack of say 5000 chips, that moment may come when the big blind is 150/200. But it may be much later, depending on how the table is playing.
I think Neil Channing is a master of this gearchange, almost instinctively going from folding to contesting every pot, then slowing down again, having lost the element of surprise, but gained a competitive stack.
BTW... Some of the massage girls in Vegas were a bit scary !!!
In Response to Re: Weird things from wsop! & Questions.... : In NLHE, I don't think he'll win another, though that's not to say I hope he will or won't. Why? 1) Field sizes have increased dramatically, so greater variance ensues. NLHE WSOP Events used to have a few hundred runners, they have many thousands now. 2) The game has changed, as the value of money, & respect for it, has diminished. Calling for your life with (say) 7-7when staked or backed by someone else, as is now common practice, is easy, so the game is tougher. There are still plenty of "soft" Bracelets in non NLHE games. "Soft" because the field sizes are much smaller, but crucially, the skill Level in many Variants is clearly far far higher than shove & hope NLHE. So he may grab a few of them, but thus far, he's shown no aptitude for anything except NLHE. DOHHHH's point may be that his game is now outdated, & his time has passed. He may well be right, too. But we can't disrespect the game of a guy who has won more Bangles than anyone else. And if he offered you or me a free lesson, we'd bite his hand off. Posted by Tikay10
Hi Takay
If you dont mind me saying I think your off the mark with the above post re his chances of future bracelets, his stats for WSOP over the last 3 years aren't 2 shabby with 17 cashes in 6 diff game types, including a 3rd,4th,7th,12th,14th etc, etc, etc granted it wasn't the ME but some of the fields were chunky and crammed full of the top boys.
I 'm not a huge fan of his but I reckon he's got a couple of bangles left in him yet.
It's important to remember Hellmuth is proven winner and he's got 11 bracelets for reason so this strategy must've worked and be acknowledged even if you don't agree with it! As Penguin eluded to, there's also an element of making grand entrance for the masses/attention seeking and these days, although I'm sure he'd like to disagree, he's there more as character/legend/face of the game rather than in genuine hope of winning, especially where the Main Event is concerned!
His theory towards the game is probably outdated/past its best but that doesn't stop us enjoying seeing Tom Watson tee up on the 1st at St Andrews or McEnroe serve volleying at Wimbledon - put it another way, we might look back at Geoff Boycott now and think his batting style is slow/outdated and would struggle to get into "modern" test teams but the games evolved (as poker continues to do) and at that time, he was up there competing with the best and for that, his record/skill/attitude to the game should be applauded whether or not they would/do achieve the same results now!
Some point during the first hour, there could be a limped pot with PH in the big blind with 4-5 off. The flop cud come 4 4 4 And he wudnt be there to win any chips. You can give me all the stats in the world, but being absent here, and missing out on lots of chips, definitely makes him less likely to win the event, than if he was there. Course it's possible to win if u turn up late, but it's less likely than if you turn up on time. Posted by DOHHHHHHH
and exactly how many chips do you think hes going
to win in this hand.Are you expecting an all-in fest.
unless its one of sky's velocity bounty hunter rebuys
It's important to remember Hellmuth is proven winner and he's got 11 bracelets for reason so this strategy must've worked and be acknowledged even if you don't agree with it! As Penguin eluded to, there's also an element of making grand entrance for the masses/attention seeking and these days, although I'm sure he'd like to disagree, he's there more as character/legend/face of the game rather than in genuine hope of winning, especially where the Main Event is concerned! His theory towards the game is probably outdated/past its best but that doesn't stop us enjoying seeing Tom Watson tee up on the 1st at St Andrews or McEnroe serve volleying at Wimbledon - put it another way, we might look back at Geoff Boycott now and think his batting style is slow/outdated and would struggle to get into "modern" test teams but the games evolved (as poker continues to do) and at that time, he was up there competing with the best and for that, his record/skill/attitude to the game should be applauded whether or not they would/do achieve the same results now! Posted by Action_Dan
Hellmuth is a proven winner in games which had minuscule fields and where people found check raising to be rude. His record doesn't mean anything, he is totally outclassed by many many online players nowadays.
His making an entrance turning up late is alot do with sponsorship (he will be payed more than the value of the tournies he is entering to do all that rubbish) combined with the fact that he doesn't want to make a mistake or be outdrawn early in the tournament. He obviously believes that he gains more by never gettign sucked out on than he does by being there. IMO he's an idiot but w/e it's good for the rest of his table as they play slightly shorthanded without an experienced player at their table.
Golfs different too btw it's you versus the course, poker is u versus the field and the toughness of the field can increase each year. The golf course is X amount of tough whilst the poker field varies in terms of how tough it is depending on who is working it out.
It's important to remember Hellmuth is proven winner and he's got 11 bracelets for reason so this strategy must've worked and be acknowledged even if you don't agree with it! As Penguin eluded to, there's also an element of making grand entrance for the masses/attention seeking and these days, although I'm sure he'd like to disagree, he's there more as character/legend/face of the game rather than in genuine hope of winning, especially where the Main Event is concerned! His theory towards the game is probably outdated/past its best but that doesn't stop us enjoying seeing Tom Watson tee up on the 1st at St Andrews or McEnroe serve volleying at Wimbledon - put it another way, we might look back at Geoff Boycott now and think his batting style is slow/outdated and would struggle to get into "modern" test teams but the games evolved (as poker continues to do) and at that time, he was up there competing with the best and for that, his record/skill/attitude to the game should be applauded whether or not they would/do achieve the same results now! Posted by Action_Dan
He wud win more if he was sat there than if he wasnt. Which wud mean he has more chips. Which wud mean he has a better chance of winning the tournament. (think of hands u wud limp in with 9 handed too deepstacked - 55-88 have to be in that range) Also he is 100% sure he will have the nuts on the turn, so any picture card, gets him action. Think ur missing the point neway - he has a better chance of winning the tourny if he's at the table all the time. lol Cant believe there's even a debate about that. Posted by DOHHHHHHH
On the other hand he could have the 88.
i think tikay is right on this one tbh
Didnt phil12uk win one of the deepies a few weeks ago after
missing at least the first hour?
You cant win the tourny in the early stages but you can lose it.
You can turn 5k into 10 k or lose the lot.The differance is you
can still win the tourny wiith 5 k you can't win it with zero.
Comments
Why?
1) Field sizes have increased dramatically, so greater variance ensues. NLHE WSOP Events used to have a few hundred runners, they have many thousands now.
2) The game has changed, as the value of money, & respect for it, has diminished. Calling for your life with (say) 7-7when staked or backed by someone else, as is now common practice, is easy, so the game is tougher.
There are still plenty of "soft" Bracelets in non NLHE games. "Soft" because the field sizes are much smaller, but crucially, the skill Level in many Variants is clearly far far higher than shove & hope NLHE. So he may grab a few of them, but thus far, he's shown no aptitude for anything except NLHE.
DOHHHH's point may be that his game is now outdated, & his time has passed. He may well be right, too. But we can't disrespect the game of a guy who has won more Bangles than anyone else. And if he offered you or me a free lesson, we'd bite his hand off.
You're right though its just best to do what you feel most comfortable with, I play cash games mostly and normally play quite laggy so got used to playing with a wide range pretty deep. But saying that in the wsop ME I would probably turn into a super nit for fear of shooting myself if I donked out early!
And i see. I understand you point fully. Maybe next yearSky could build up a team for these side events Tikay? see if any of us could compete?
You had a lot of chips, AND Position on me, & I knew what you were doing. So I limp-raised you frequently, because I know how players get early chips, & what players who get "early chips" do with them! You were "pressing" with air, & I was back-raising with air. I'd do it to ANY Tourney player who had early chips, never mind one who was as excellent as you.
Early chips align with a saying in life. Easy come, easy go. I LOVE players on my Table who have early chips.
Now & then - every 7 years on average - I'll get an AA v KK Double-Up early doors, so I then have to sit-out even longer.
"Modern" players disagree with this, which is fine by me. But they cannot say it's wrong, because they don't actually know. It's just a different way of approaching the game. Some might say - don't all get cross with me, please - it's a "thinking" approach.......
I can see where phil hellmuth comes from and tikay, in a tournament I prefer starting slow and getting busier when the blinds are higher, so often you see players run good for the first few levels then go card dead and not even make the final table, the first few levels are a recipe for disaster in deepstack tournaments with no raise being respected
I tend to think that Phil Hellmuths late arrival has more to do with his wish to make a grand entrance rather than any tactical considerations.
Although I appreciate Tikays comment that a tourny can be lost but not won in the early stages, I hate to miss any of the early action.
I think it is invaluable to at least be at the table to assess the opposition and select a target for later on. Just by being there folding hands, you are also creating your own table image.
And personally I do prefer to try and pick up a few chips, to keep my stack above the average for the table. But there is little value in playing marginal hands and button raising any unraised pot, because the blinds are so low, the risk is usually greater than the reward.
The question is at what stage do you change gear and start playing more aggressive poker?
To me, in a well structured tourny, with a starting stack of say 5000 chips, that moment may come when the big blind is 150/200. But it may be much later, depending on how the table is playing.
I think Neil Channing is a master of this gearchange, almost instinctively going from folding to contesting every pot, then slowing down again, having lost the element of surprise, but gained a competitive stack.
BTW... Some of the massage girls in Vegas were a bit scary !!!
Hi Takay
If you dont mind me saying I think your off the mark with the above post re his chances of future bracelets, his stats for WSOP over the last 3 years aren't 2 shabby with 17 cashes in 6 diff game types, including a 3rd,4th,7th,12th,14th etc, etc, etc granted it wasn't the ME but some of the fields were chunky and crammed full of the top boys.
I 'm not a huge fan of his but I reckon he's got a couple of bangles left in him yet.
Always a pleasure