WSOP on ESPN thread (8/28 - Day 1C and Day 1D)

[Veil]

[ QUOTE ]
"Jeezus Jamie Gold. That was an embarrassing display of IDK what! He was playing like it was a $1 tourney online and he had a plane to catch"

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I'll have to take your word on that one, seeing as though you must be doing the rounds on frequent $1 tourneys.

And to anyone else ignorantly bashing Gold in this episode: there wasn't a single hand he played badly that we saw (ESPN probably didn't show the hands that were making Gold upset about his play). The first hand, Hougaard played like an absolute moron calling that much so early on with these small blinds. But I guess all you guys know that already, being frequent main event players? The only thing Jamie did wrong was apparently not realise (was it first hand or edited I wonder?) how much of a lunatic Hougaard was, actually calling him down with that piece of junk when it's cleanly reasonable to put a pre-flop raiser on at least an over-pair this early on, or if you're going by the post-flop play and Jamie's tendency to raise pre-flop with any two cards; then him having 3/4, 4/5, etc, etc, is clearly reasonable, and to risk that many chips early on was absolutely amazingly bad.

The Rosent hand? Jamie thought he had over-cards and not the over-pair, DUH. So now, he does what most pros do and takes one off after a small bet (and after pairing). Now, turn bet is even smaller giving him correct odds to continue no matter what. Did I miss something? Jamie played this hand bad??? Which hand did he play badly? Oh that's right, the J/9 hand where it was extremely unlucky for his opponents to be playing the hand this way, and extremely complex to be able to call the river bet? Or the freakish flush hand when Hougaard tricked him by using what Gold PATENDED for crying out loud. And the other J/9 hand where Hougaard folded, I'd like to see any of you try and lie as good as Gold did there. I'm a part psych major and I've been trained to successfully tell lies with a 95% accuracy and I'll be honest in that I would have been suckered in there to fold too. And you're all whining about him whining with the 5/2o hand? Jeez, you guys must have never touched a girl, oh I mean played in a big tournament before. To get multiple callers first of all was unlucky, to make a straight and lose is also extremely unlucky. Was it a good fold? It was alright, but the thing is, no matter WHAT Gold does, you prejudicial, sarcastic fools will either be like "lolol good laydown??" or just stay silent and pretend it didn't happen.

And as an aside: anyone saying Gold got luckier in last years' main event than anyone who won a WPT or a recent main event should just reconsider this game, because if this is true then the entire game is luck. I mean, do you actually think Gold made more hands than he stole to get and hold this massive chip lead? Out of hundreds and hundreds of hands throughout the tournament, the pots he would be taking would result in him bluffing around 85% more often than him making a good hand and someone making something better for the pot to be worthwhile.

Oh and for the inevitable poster(s) that will respond with something about me loving Gold; let me say that Gold is undeniably and undoubtedly a fine tournament hold'em player. What he did in last years' main event will NEVER be equaled again. To lead for that long is just mind boggling and breathtaking and anyone who can't appreciative this because you may dislike his antics or the such - should either grow up or learn the bloody game.

PS: the last hand; how the hell can Tucker call 400 then decide, "Hm I guess I'll call FOUR THOUSAND more now with A/7" ?? And let's not forget the Ace-high vs King-high flush with only three diamonds on board. That has got to be one of the worst played hands of all time. Yet, you guys just focus on Gold because you're already predisposed to hating him. Nice one, guys.