Hellmuth Crushing at the WSOP

[JoaoPinto]

It's completely ridiculous because the exact opposite is true. Phil won his 9 bracelets when pros vastly outnumbered amatuers at the WSOP. He was the national heads up champion against an all elite field and has done well at various tournament of champion and invitational events with all superstars. He has struggled if anything with the weaker fields because his reads are not spot on with bad players, especially bad hyper aggressive players who are a post moneymaker incarnation. Coming to terms with that plus variance evening out for him is responsible for his good run this year.

He went on monster tilt on HSP after getting cold decked on the QQ - KQ hand. How would you feel if someone took footage of you having a bad night and used it to dismiss everything you ever have achieved and are ever going to achieve? I don't think there's a player in the game that would do well on a night where barry greenstein was cold decking them.

[AtTheMovies]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there anywhere I can get a complete list of who's left?

[/ QUOTE ]

is this what you were asking about? from cardplayer:

Seat 1 - Ralph Perry $235,000

Seat 2 - Terris Preston $164,000

Seat 3 - Antanas 'Tony' Guoga $77,000

Seat 4 - John Spadavecchia $122,000

Seat 5 - Elio Cabrera $95,000

Seat 6 - David Plastik $121,000

Seat 7 - Empty

Seat 8 - Juha Helppi $436,000

Seat 9 - Phil Hellmuth $768,000

Seat 10 - Daryn Firicano $450,000

[nath]

that is a sick final table
GO DARYN

[thedarknight]

[ QUOTE ]
It's completely ridiculous because the exact opposite is true. Phil won his 9 bracelets when pros vastly outnumbered amatuers at the WSOP. He was the national heads up champion against an all elite field and has done well at various tournament of champion and invitational events with all superstars. He has struggled if anything with the weaker fields because his reads are not spot on with bad players, especially bad hyper aggressive players who are a post moneymaker incarnation. Coming to terms with that plus variance evening out for him is responsible for his good run this year.

He went on monster tilt on HSP after getting cold decked on the QQ - KQ hand. How would you feel if someone took footage of you having a bad night and used it to dismiss everything you ever have achieved and are ever going to achieve? I don't think there's a player in the game that would do well on a night where barry greenstein was cold decking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah A4 and 66 was some terrible cold deck hands. poor phil.

in regards to his 9 bracelets when the the pros outnumbered the amateurs, those were the days when mainstay pros like doyle, barry, chip, etc. didn't give a damn about the bracelets. todd brunson mentioned back in the day, "why does phil try so hard to get these bracelets?" then admitted..."well I guess he knew something we didn't." The big time pros didn't play in these dinky small events..they were there to make the cash in the big games...now they're playing in more of them because they carry prestige. whether that makes winning bracelets easier is up to debate....Phil knows how to read the amateurs well...he makes certain folds because he doesn't want to take the gamble. he makes these lay downs to wait for a better spot...sometimes even foregoing a huge edge.

[JoaoPinto]

yeah A4 and 66 was some terrible cold deck hands. poor phil.

The KQ hand was a cold deck and the 66 was not an unreasonable move. Granted Phil shouldnt have been in the pot with the A4 but he was tilting and it was very hard for him to put Negreanu on what he had. We've seen worse from other players who don't get anything like the grief Phil gets.

in regards to his 9 bracelets when the the pros outnumbered the amateurs, those were the days when mainstay pros like doyle, barry, chip, etc. didn't give a damn about the bracelets.

Chip Reese cashed in hellmuth's 1989 main event. http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/even...a=r&n=8011 as did todd brunson himself in an event hellmuth won in 1997
http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/even...a=r&n=7811

Phil has consistenly won and cashed in events with top players in them. What about the 2nd in this years $5,000 NLH event? That contained just about every top pro around today.

[WSOPChump]

the big named pros have always played the main event.

he means the 1K to 5K events in the past.

[ QUOTE ]
There isnt a hand that villian plays this way that Phil doesnt beat.
~Justin

[/ QUOTE ]

You joker. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[WSOPChump]

it would not be a contradiction to say that perhaps phil has adjusted his game and is not as willing to get runover by lags as he was in the past?

negreanu has stated this is phil's problem (he wont play a big pot unless he's a huge favorite) and he made alot of big laydowns on TV tournaments in the past.

yeah variance explains it but it also sounds like phil may have tweaked his strategy a bit.

[eclinchy]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Reading it clearly PF, JJ was re-raised. Unless villain has loose image on the table, the raised indicated AA,KK,AK;


[/ QUOTE ]

I have my doubts. Against a random amateur, a reraise might mean AQ-A9 or QQ-88 or so. It depends on reads, which Phil has and we don't. So let's not speculate that much.

[ QUOTE ]
2. Since Phil act first, the call of villain's all-in may indicate Phil put villian on AK but want to get lucky catching J on later street? Pot-odd still doesn't justify?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, of course not. Phil's getting somewhere in the neighborhood of 3:1 on his money, and with two jacks left in the deck, he's like 9:1. Not even close.

[ QUOTE ]
3. What if Villian acted first on the flop and pushed all-in? Phil still would call?


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume so. I don't think that really changes much of anything.

[ QUOTE ]
Remember Chris Moneymakers' 88 all-in on the K9x flop and turned 8 cracked the AA? You can't explain everyhand technically, it has gamble/lucky factors. I think this year's ME winner will have many bad moves at the right time.


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your "you can't explain everyhand technically" claim. I think that's one of the great things about poker -- that any hand can be dissected and any decision can be re-examined. (In the case of your Moneymaker example however, my technical explanation is little more than "Moneymaker's a donk who got lucky.") [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

And as for the ME winner, of course he's going to get lucky with good timing. No one, especially not in a tournament field as huge as this year's ME will be, wins a tournament without doing so. But to say he will make "many bad moves" is going a bit overboard. I think the ME winner, whether any of us have heard of him or not, will be a good player. The Varkonyi/Moneymaker days are over -- you don't just outlast thousands of players on luck alone.

[WSOPChump]

I dont think its fair to call moneymaker a donk. he took second in a wpt event, also, and he is not a WPT regular. so im assuming he is positive for the last two years excluding the WSOP win.

i think paul phillips said moneymaker is a good player who is very aggressive and that a good aggressive player has alot better shot in a tourney than a good somewaht conservative player. moneymaker might not be an elite player but i think he is above average.

varkoni is another story. i dont think he plays very much but he has not had a big score since then. though not having seen him play it would be unfair to call him a donk.