Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems again our resident ME champ 2005 has once again cashed in a 2000+ event, and is now 5 for 5 in them cashing. I think he may have even won one.

VNJ Greg, congrats.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems again our resident ME champ 2005 has once again cashed in a 2000+ event, and is now 5 for 5 in them cashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I will correct you.

Raymer won the 2004 Main Event, not the 2005.

I heard some guy named Joe Hachem won the 2005 ME.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
is now 5 for 5 in them cashing

[/ QUOTE ]

http://gobboboy.homestead.com/files/gobbovariance.gif

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

How did he not win this hand?

Wed Jun 28 01:02:00 PDT 2006
Raymer Loses a Large Pot
Greg Raymer calls an opponent's all-in with pocket Queens. His opponent shows AK. The board comes KJ2AT and Raymer drops to $15,500.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
How did he not win this hand?

Wed Jun 28 01:02:00 PDT 2006
Raymer Loses a Large Pot
Greg Raymer calls an opponent's all-in with pocket Queens. His opponent shows AK. The board comes KJ2AT and Raymer drops to $15,500.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would assume opponent made a flush

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

If by 2000+ you mean $2000+, I'll correct you too... This is a $1500 event.

if you mean year, my apologies.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

OP meant 2000+ players.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
OP meant 2000+ players.

[/ QUOTE ]

all clear - apologies to OP...

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is now 5 for 5 in them cashing

[/ QUOTE ]

http://gobboboy.homestead.com/files/gobbovariance.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

roflmao

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems again our resident ME champ 2005 has once again cashed in a 2000+ event, and is now 5 for 5 in them cashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I will correct you.

Raymer won the 2004 Main Event, not the 2005.

I heard some guy named Joe Hachem won the 2005 ME.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was, uh just checking to see if any of you were paying attention..... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Thanks. I have cashed in every live event I've ever entered that had more than 2000 entrants. There have been 5 of them. As far as I know, there have never been any other open live events with over 2000 players, and I believe I am the only person to cash in all 5. With a bit under 10% of the field getting paid in each of these events, I am currently bucking odds of about 150,000:1 against.

Can't wait for #6!!

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems again our resident ME champ 2005 has once again cashed in a 2000+ event, and is now 5 for 5 in them cashing. I think he may have even won one.

VNJ Greg, congrats.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow - impressive record indeed - congrats Greg and good luck in the rest of the events this year!

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks. I have cashed in every live event I've ever entered that had more than 2000 entrants. There have been 5 of them. As far as I know, there have never been any other open live events with over 2000 players, and I believe I am the only person to cash in all 5. With a bit under 10% of the field getting paid in each of these events, I am currently bucking odds of about 150,000:1 against.

Can't wait for #6!!

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Truly impressive Greg.

Best of luck to you this year.

Needless to say you are one of my favorites, and one of my group's favorites as well.

You have a lot of respect from me for a lot of reasons...not just because of this impressive feat.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

That's assuming that you're an average player, which at least IMO you are not. After all, you're the anchor man on my WSOPME Fantasy Team again this year. Go Greg!!!

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
How did he not win this hand?

Wed Jun 28 01:02:00 PDT 2006
Raymer Loses a Large Pot
Greg Raymer calls an opponent's all-in with pocket Queens. His opponent shows AK. The board comes KJ2AT and Raymer drops to $15,500.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same with this hand: (They really need to glance at these before they post them)

Thu Jun 29 16:22:07 PDT 2006
Don Zewin Doubles Up
Don Zewin moves all in preflop for around $230,000. It is fold around to Carlos Mortensen on the small blind who makes the call. Zewin shows 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]10[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and Mortensen is behind with A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. The board of Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] does not improve Mortensen and Zewin doubles up.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks. I have cashed in every live event I've ever entered that had more than 2000 entrants. There have been 5 of them. As far as I know, there have never been any other open live events with over 2000 players, and I believe I am the only person to cash in all 5. With a bit under 10% of the field getting paid in each of these events, I am currently bucking odds of about 150,000:1 against.

Can't wait for #6!!

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, you must have around a 3x chance of cashing compared to the field if the play in this year's Event 2 is any indication.

So I think it's more like 300:1. Still running well, I guess. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

His strategy is well suited for playing large fields against relatively weak opposition.

What strategy is that? Well, it should be obvious to most, but basically he tries to constantly play a big stack against a small stack for all the chips before the flop as long as he thinks he's not in terrible shape. If they fold, he gains. If they call and win, he loses little. If they call and lose, they are out and he gains more chips.

Why is this the perfect strategy? Because he is constantly putting his opponent at maximum jeopardy when their edge, if any is small, with minimum risk to his own stack. Playing this way also lets him avoid having to make tough decisions after the flop. This works to his advantage if he is weak post flop or if he happens to be in a hand against a tough opponent. Also, he doesnt get bluffed out and he doesnt try hopelessly to bluff out weak calling stations.

I wonder what his strategy is early on in the tournament, when his stack is not built up yet. There isnt much footage of him playing in these stages of the tournament.

Watch him play against the line up of pros at the TOC in 2004. Not so impressive. Not his cup of tea. Similiarly, watch him try to bluff out Murphy in 2004 main event and get rebluffed off of the best hand when Murphy holds a straight flush draw and Raymer holds king high. choke.

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Is this a joke? Or do you actually believe that A) the hands shown on ESPN are a good representation of what goes on in tournament poker B) that this limit pro doesn't know how to play post flop. C) Failed bluffs are an indication of a poor player. D) That one magically has a "big stack" with which to push around little stacks. E) That Greg Raymer isn't one of the 100 best all around poker players currently in the game.

Do you have the faintest idea of what it is like to play poker or do you just watch ESPN and expound on your "theories"?

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

JJNJustin, you seem confused, it's not that he has one set strategy that jsut happens to play good in large fields, I have no doubt that he plays differently in different situations. You seem to think it's something passive and unimpressive that his strategy kills large fields, whereas in reality it is something active and is indicative of his overall quality as poker player. His play at the TOC seemed pretty good, but with a limited number of hands being shown it's hard to tell either way.

Also, Raymers flop and post flop play, from the limted amount of hands we have seen on TV is pretty damn solid.

[ QUOTE ]
Similiarly, watch him try to bluff out Murphy in 2004 main event and get rebluffed off of the best hand when Murphy holds a straight flush draw and Raymer holds king high. choke.

[/ QUOTE ]

This part of your post makes me think you are just joking around trying to ellicit the kind of response I gave you. Are you a troll or just jealous of pro players?

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

"Similiarly, watch him try to bluff out Murphy in 2004 main event and get rebluffed off of the best hand when Murphy holds a straight flush draw and Raymer holds king high. choke."


Murphy had an inside straight draw as well. I agree that Raymer should have called him down with King high instead of folding. What a pussy.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

He has an ideal strategy for playing tournaments with large fields with mostly weak players but a small percentage of pros. I believe this is what has made him successful in recent years tournaments. His aggression and all-in early strategy keep top pros from outplaying him and he gets profitable calls from weak fish with lesser hands.

Sklansky has commented in his Tournament Poker book on the value of such a simple tournament strategy. Raymer has combined what poker skills he has with a strong but simple strategy and it is producing good results.

But if you watch him play on smaller tournaments with tougher players such as the TOC 2004 and the poker superstars he doesnt fair as well. He is very mathematically and statistically oriented. I think he is a solid-rigid sort of grinder type player turned successful tournament player. But his play doesnt ever strike me as creative, insightful, risky, nor brilliant. And that's okay! Actually, it makes for very boring poker.

That's not good nor bad. His playing style has worked out extremely well for him, financially. So, really, who cares?

And of course I'm forming my opinions based on what I've seen on television. Am I supposed to wait until I play him heads up to form an opinion or get a first impression?

You cant make any judgement on the guy's post flop play because he always seems to be all-in preflop or right on the flop!?!? I cant even think of any hands where there was significant post flop drama.

Prove me wrong. And who cares? It doesnt matter.

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Similiarly, watch him try to bluff out Murphy in 2004 main event and get rebluffed off of the best hand when Murphy holds a straight flush draw and Raymer holds king high. choke."


Murphy had an inside straight draw as well. I agree that Raymer should have called him down with King high instead of folding. What a pussy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice sarcasm. You get 10 points for sarcasm and 0 for content. Him and Murphy were like gigantic cheap leaders and this was a recipe for disaster. Both of them were getting very aggressive, and neither of them had a hand. Lucky for them both the hand ended when it did.

And what was up with the 8-9 all-in against Annie Duke in the TOC? Was this a bluff? What was this?

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

(Most of the backhanded compliments snipped)

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, it makes for very boring poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hadn't realized that the goal in poker is to be exciting.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Ive played with him briefly in an online tournament, and can guarantee youve misunderstood just how capable a player he is. He isnt the all in specialist, one trick pony, that he seems to have been portrayed as.

To give you an example, this is the guy who either:
a, invented the stop and go
b, put a name to the stop and go and delivered it to the masses on here

His archived posts formed the basis for most of the modern thinking on how to approach big field tourneys like you find online (and now in live events like the WSOP).

He really is the man.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
His archived posts formed the basis for most of the modern thinking on how to approach big field tourneys like you find online (and now in live events like the WSOP).

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you know of any specific posts of his I can search for where he writes about this?

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky has commented in his Tournament Poker book on the value of such a simple tournament strategy. Raymer has combined what poker skills he has with a strong but simple strategy and it is producing good results.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, Raymer, the master of the Kill Phil philosophy.

[ QUOTE ]
But if you watch him play on smaller tournaments with tougher players such as the TOC 2004 and the poker superstars he doesnt fair as well. He is very mathematically and statistically oriented. I think he is a solid-rigid sort of grinder type player turned successful tournament player. But his play doesnt ever strike me as creative, insightful, risky, nor brilliant. And that's okay! Actually, it makes for very boring poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sound quite the authority ... 2 questions or stfu!

1. What exactly are your qualifications to making these judgements. Hendon Mob site to you would suffice. Or, just some details on the results of your "exciting" play.

2. How often and where have you sweated Raymer that would give you this insight into his game? Or, is it all from TV.

[ QUOTE ]
And of course I'm forming my opinions based on what I've seen on television. Am I supposed to wait until I play him heads up to form an opinion or get a first impression?

[/ QUOTE ]

Never mind on 2. You've proven you're a moran. You come to all these conclusions from a few televised hands that you've seen? Go away, Troll. Seriously, I am not one that defends Raymer as a matter of reflex. But, your post is just dumb if all you have to go by are a few televised hands.

[ QUOTE ]
You cant make any judgement on the guy's post flop play because he always seems to be all-in preflop or right on the flop!?!? I cant even think of any hands where there was significant post flop drama.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa, you think? So, out of the 50 hands or so you've seen from the 2004 ME (where he played several thousand, at least), you think you have his game down? Ever think about that fact that post-flop play isn't as exciting to ESPN as the "all-ins," never mind that they take too long when you have an hour show?

[ QUOTE ]
Prove me wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've not even come close to proving you're right. Televised hands ... sheeeesh.

NCAces

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Just search the archives for posts he made and start reading.

NCAces

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
You cant make any judgement on the guy's post flop play because he always seems to be all-in preflop or right on the flop!?!? I cant even think of any hands where there was significant post flop drama.

Prove me wrong. And who cares? It doesnt matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, you're right. i can't think of even one hand with aaron kanter in last year's ME that had an iota of postflop drama.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You cant make any judgement on the guy's post flop play because he always seems to be all-in preflop or right on the flop!?!? I cant even think of any hands where there was significant post flop drama.

Prove me wrong. And who cares? It doesnt matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, you're right. i can't think of even one hand with aaron kanter in last year's ME that had an iota of postflop drama.

[/ QUOTE ]

YOU can't make any judgement because all YOU have to go on is ESPN... you shouldn't judge too many people by the hands ESPN shows in its coverage which we all know is a few hands and a bunch of commercials with Jesus in some dopes fridge... Greg is a nasty poker player who has worked really hard to get where he is now...

*edit* NCAces said it right... didn't read too much of the thread

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

I played right next to Greg (fortunately on his left) for the first several hours of event #2 on Tuesday. Obviously, you see a lot more in person than on TV, but he is even better than I previously gave him credit for. He opens a lot of pots and plays quite aggressively preflop. This seems to allow him to quietly build a stack without risking a lot in big confrontations. He also isn't afraid to call raises/reraises with hands that aren't very strong with the hopes of flopping a big hand or outplaying an inexperienced opponent. Another weapon in his arsenal is that he is very good at putting people on hands. He nailed me on what I had two different times. Something else that doesn't quite come across on TV is his personality. He has a sense of humor and is quite friendly. This light-hearted attitude seems to have the effect of relaxing most of the table. The problem for me is that when I'm relaxed and having a good time, I'm not always completely focused and playing my best poker. I assume other players are the same way. There were a couple times when I think he got me to make sub-optimal plays or at least give away some information that I shouldn't have. Basically, Raymer just does a lot of things right that allow him to do very well in tournaments.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

1) People on here seem to think you have to have proven yourself in some way to make any sort of comments about other successful players, yet they themselves are regularly dissing other non professional players to a much harsher degree.

2) Nobody on here ever has the ballz to say anything but ass-kissing all emcompassing praise to well known figures who frequent this site.

3) Apparently you can only make value judgements about a pro's playing style if you have seen them play on some other genre besides cable television. And apparently everyone else has but me.

4) I take back EVERYTHING I said. Greg Raymer is just a super duper player with no faults whatsoever. I really like the way he plays poker because he is just such a great poker player. He does everything right and he is just great great great. He is the kill phil and stop and go king. He is the massive field king. He is the king period. All hail king Raymer. We're not worthy. We're not worthy.

5) moran ----> moron Hey guy, you're an ideeyut.

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]


3) Apparently you can only make value judgements about a pro's playing style if you have seen them play on some other genre besides cable television. And apparently everyone else has but me.

-J

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please do some more strategic analysis of players you've never played with or even seen play more than a few hands on TV? I find it so fascinating.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

Is there anyway we can add the moron vs. moran explanation to a FAQ or something?

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]

4) I take back EVERYTHING I said. Greg Raymer is just a super duper player with no faults whatsoever. I really like the way he plays poker because he is just such a great poker player. He does everything right and he is just great great great. He is the kill phil and stop and go king. He is the massive field king. He is the king period. All hail king Raymer. We're not worthy. We're not worthy.

5) moran ----> moron Hey guy, you're an ideeyut.


[/ QUOTE ]

4) Yep, you can always tell the loser of an argument by their sarcastically agreeing tirade at the end.

5) Moran is an internet colloquialism, moran.

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) People on here seem to think you have to have proven yourself in some way to make any sort of comments about other successful players, yet they themselves are regularly dissing other non professional players to a much harsher degree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine that, we might value the opinion more of one who actually knows what they are talking about. Does it not make sense that I would like to know your level skill when you opine about a well known, successful, poker player. For example, whose critique of Pete Rose's hitting capabilities would you put more faith in ... mine, or Ted Williams (when he was alive). You should answer Ted Williams because someone who is also an accomplished hitter is in a better position to judge ... hence my wanting you to explain the expertise that you have to judge professional poker players. From your lack of an answer, I am assuming you have no tournament wins, have never played a WPT or WSOP event, and are not even a champion at your local World Tavern League event. Therefore, while you hav a right to your opinion, I have a right to discount it as having no basis in fact or knoweldge.


[ QUOTE ]
2) Nobody on here ever has the ballz to say anything but ass-kissing all emcompassing praise to well known figures who frequent this site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you have not been on the TV/WSOP forum for long (which, by the way, speaks well of you). Many a well known figure has frequented these forums for a few posts before realizing that they are going to be criticized by numb nut know-it-alls who tell them how badly they play from the 15 televised hands they have seen. Oh, wait a minute, that's you.


[ QUOTE ]
Apparently you can only make value judgements about a pro's playing style if you have seen them play on some other genre besides cable television. And apparently everyone else has but me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, yeah. You do realize how stupid it is to make value judgments based on TV hands, yes?


[ QUOTE ]
4) I take back EVERYTHING I said. Greg Raymer is just a super duper player with no faults whatsoever. I really like the way he plays poker because he is just such a great poker player. He does everything right and he is just great great great. He is the kill phil and stop and go king. He is the massive field king. He is the king period. All hail king Raymer. We're not worthy. We're not worthy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even those who are his biggest defenders here don't think that. But, they are smart enough to know not to judge him or anyone else by TV hands. You are not alone in getting rediculed for that. However, you are turning out to be one of the more enjoyable people to redicule about that.


[ QUOTE ]
5) moran ----> moron Hey guy, you're an ideeyut.

[/ QUOTE ]

No apology necessary, moran, it's somewhat of an inside joke.

http://www.strangesigns.org/albums/People/moron.jpg

NCAces

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

I never said I thought the guy was a bad player. Quite the contrary. All I said was he happens to employ a style that is working very well against large fields of mostly weaker players with a smaller proportion of strong players. I then went on to comment that from the relatively little I've seen on television, he seems to be playing the big stack in such a fashion to put his opponents to tough decisions by getting them all-in early on in the hand.

I then commented on why I think this strategy is successful, and for him it has been extremely successful, earning him millions of dollars.

But then I've also observed that if you put him in a smaller field of relatively tough players, he might not fair as well. Conversely, I think players like Negreanu and Hellmuth might fair better than Raymer against smaller tougher fields, but poorer compared to Raymer against these large fields with mediocre opposition.

Replying to my original post with all these extra posts is really unnecessary. It's not like I said anything extraordinary. You guys are making a big deal out of it. Sorry if you felt I was being harsh towards your big 2+2 hero. I wasnt trying to be.

This is my opinion, I dont think I am being harshly judgemental. If you want to spend time picking my posts apart, making sarcastic comments, quoting me out of context, and entertaining yourselves in that way it makes me no difference to me.

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

one of my best friends' last name is moran

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

JJN ...

The problem is that you have absolutely no idea what Raymer or any other pro's "style" is. Period. That is what is so humerous about your posts. I couldn't care less what you say about Raymer or any other pro, so I am not defending them.

Just realize that when you make broad, definitive statements about anyone's "style" when you've seen less than a percent of the hands that they had dealt to them in a televised tournament, you look the fool.

Step back from the keyboard for a minute and you will see that those giving you a hard time are not defending Raymer, but rediculing that you believe you can do this with such certainty, with such limited input.

NCAces

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

I suppose then the only people allowed to form opinions about top pros are those who have logged a certain number of hours playing with them personally? And I suppose that would be you? And the rest of us who just watch ESPN are all clueless morAns?

-J

Re: Raymer: king of the massive events!
 

I am going to try one last time, so please think this through.

[ QUOTE ]
I suppose then the only people allowed to form opinions about top pros are those who have logged a certain number of hours playing with them personally?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, anyone is allowed to form opinions. But those of us who waste our time here can question the basis upon which one forms and then expresses those opinions. If we feel that there is no basis in fact, skill or knowledge for one to form and express those opinions, our right to question the foundation of your opinions is equal to your right to express them.

It has to make sense to you that I would be far more likely to assign any amount of credibility to your opinions if you were a pro player and had played with the pros (or maybe even sweated a few thousand hands of the pro). In this instance, you have made definitive statements about a pro's - Greg Raymer's - style, when you have never played with, never spoken to, nor even met the pro (I am assuming all these to be true has you have said your full basis for your opinion was TV).

So, opine all you want about things you know nothing about, and you will be rediculed endlessly here. For good reason.

[ QUOTE ]
And I suppose that would be you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not me. I met Greg last year at the WSOP and we spoke for about 2 minutes and he signed a chip for me (yeah, I was WSOP wannabee boy that day). I sweated his table for an hour. I have probably seen the same hands on TV you've seen. I wouldn't even think about coming on this forum and start making definitive statements about his playing style. All I can say is (1) he has proven that he is a good player, and (2) he is a heck of a nice guy based on my short personal interaction, as well as all the posts he made here that has helped many 2+2ers.

You are the one extrapolating all sorts of information from a couple dozen hands you've seen on TV, not me.

[ QUOTE ]
And the rest of us who just watch ESPN are all clueless morAns?

[/ QUOTE ]

We almost agree. Most people who watch ESPN don't go around talking as if they actually think they have can definitively peg someone's style from a few hands. They know better. Those that do, like you, are clueless morans.

NCAces