[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not a hater by any means, and I also thought he played the FT very well...however, I thought those comments in his interview were kind of weird.

He also made a comment about how people "got lucky" against him but he somehow still managed to prevail....come on....if he had just said "yeah, I got lucky winning all those fricken coin flips too" then maybe it wouldn't be weird, but all he said was basically "I outplayed everyone, they got lucky every once in a while but I still won." It takes a lot of courage to "play the player" when you have a 500 to 1 chip lead and you win every coin flip.

[/ QUOTE ]

Herein lies the problem ... you didn't understand what he was saying about "luck" and yet use it against him. What he said about others getting lucky was was simple and true:

Once he got his big stack, and if he played his stack properly, the only way he would have been able to lose would have been if the others got lucky. In that context he isn't saying he wasn't lucky, or that others were. Only that if he played his stack right, only luck was going to beat him.

We all agree he could have donked it off. That would be the "if I play my big stack right" part. And all the pros we've heard from, as well as most people here, have said that he played his stack really well. So he didn't donk off his chips, and was never in the position to. He kept the pots relatively small, pressured the hell out of people, played so many hands it had to be near impossible to get a read (his talking notwithstanding). Most of the time he was all-in he had the best of it. As he mentioned in his interview, he was running his strategy by Chan each night.

The luck he was referring to was that which would have happened if suddenly he started getting in bigger pots with the best of it and they drew out on him.

There were a ton of posts here about the "Black melt down," or that "AC was going to outplay him," etc. That which he could control, he did. That then leaves the alot of the rest to luck.

NCAces