WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

So many in this and other 2p2 forums dismiss big tournaments such as WSOP ME and various Stars and FTP large-field large-purse tournaments as "donkaments" not worthy as true tests of world-class poker skill.

Yes, the WSOP ME is just one tournament and bestowing fame on the winner in absence of any other claim is perhaps unjustified and inappropriate. Obviously, in a game with a large luck component, one tourney doesn't mean much.

But does that mean the WSOP ME should be looked down upon as a "donkament", a term that refers to a tourney field chock full of bad players where skill is therefore of discounted value.

I don't think there's any proof that winning vs a field with high % of bad players is any more or less difficult than winning vs a field with high % of good players. Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

The fact that non-world-class players often win huge high-profile tournaments does not necessarily imply that it is easier or harder for a world-class player to win same.

On the one hand, yes, in large fields of bad players, some small % of those shooting the moon in a series of high-risk high-reward EV- plays will amass giant stacks relatively early.

But is this a detriment or a benefit to the world-class player ? One could argue that part of being world-class is knowing how to manipulate such lunatics once they've amassed a larger stack, and some world-class players are better at it than others. One could also argue that an "early lunatic" style is not necessarily lunacy, and that some great tourney players in fact purposefully take a series of EV- shots early and if successful switch gears into table bully mode or pick-off mode as a long-term EV+ strategy over many tournies.

And does the loose-passive nature of many donks have the same effect on all world-class players ? I think not. I think some, like Daniel Negreanu, are much better at manipulating loose-passive players, and that such manipulation is as much a foundation skill component of being world-class as any other skill.

Tournament poker is a game where the income of the pros is provided by the other players. Yes, once you're world-class, you probably have other income streams, but to get to be world-class you have to work up through the pro ranks.

Therefore, it's kind of silly to say that skill in manipulating lesser players, specifically multitudes of bad players, is not a representative skill for a world-class player.

In fact, I would argue that it should be considered *the* representative skill. World-class tournament poker players such as Chris Ferguson and Carlos Mortensen do not avoid "conspiracies of idiocy" as high-stakes cash game pros might and concentrate on one big whale. Rather, they make their livings precisely by welcoming competition from hordes of bad players.

If world-class players had disdain for "donkaments" they wouldn't play them. The fact that most world-class players play many WSOP events, and many big online tournaments, proves that these events in fact are not "donkaments" at all.

I think that what the modern-day WSOP ME and other big-field big-purse tournies do is spread final outcome variance significantly outside the realm many pros are comfortable with. Some learn to adapt their strategies to this variance, others do not and blame "donkaments".

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

lol donkaments

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

tldr;

LOL DONKAMENTS.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
tldr;

LOL DONKAMENTS.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

If a level: too long
If not a level: LOL @ OP

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

The problem with saying "lol donkaments" at everything is that pretty soon your entire world is one big donkament and then ten years later you wake up with nothing because you never took anything seriously because who can take donkaments seriously.

This is why Barry was embarrassed at having to say "lol donkaments" on HSP and probably regretted it afterwards because he is not an "lol donkaments" kind of guy even if he does green leak to charity.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by Dids

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think there's any proof that winning vs a field with high % of bad players is any more or less difficult than winning vs a field with high % of good players. Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I know the common wisdom is that one plus one equals two, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's any proof that winning vs a field with high % of bad players is any more or less difficult than winning vs a field with high % of good players. Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you need to?

ESPN got you brainwashed

Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
 

"One could argue that part of being world-class is knowing how to manipulate such lunatics once they've amassed a larger stack, and some world-class players are better at it than others.'

The amassing of capital in inefficient hands is generally corrected by the market, as better capitalists acquire the capital, i.e "chips", from less effective capitaists.

On the other hand, maybe No Limit Tournament play is NOT rocket science, and a player of moderate skill can acquire early sufficient capital to overwhelm the "greater skill" of a more thinly capitalized opponent in later stages. (This was the basis of Sklansky's system of a couple of years ago.)

Correspondingly, as many "Name" pros are now capitalized by sites such as FTP, isn't it possible that you see/hear about some "Name" pros ONLY because they are widely marketed and placed into more tourneys to begin with. On their own, how many would drop from sight versus the un-subsidized, un-marketed so-called donk winners of large MTTS ?

Who makes more money in commerce: the talented but undercapitalized independent movie concept or High School Musical/Disney ?

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
 

When somebody makes a lousy post, which this OP sure is, let's all try and find more creative ways to inform him of that fact.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

Jamie Gold can't beat $25NL, therefore a donk.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

LoL DonKaMentS

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

Look here dids really made me think, and now instead of my trite making fun of him,

Op i think i shall have to hire a creative team to work on this plan of making fun of you and then deliver something that can best be described as

Literally earthshattering (like most people who say literally on the internets, its meaning here is figurative)

Don't underestimate the lengths i'm willing to go and the money i'm willing to spend to achievev this.

Only time will tell if this masterpiece of a plan will acheive fruition.

Not only can many people vouch for the fact that I'm willing to go to any lengths to make fun of a person if needed but iI have the resources as well.

Krazy Karl's is an advertising branch out of madison avenue that i think would be perfect for thinking up innovative ways of belittling you.

And hopefully they can show how useless you are and how no one cares.

Meanwhile, in reality, the amount of time this will take will be huge.

Energy expended in this, massive.

Nothing can deter me from this goal though.

The only issue I see is the amount of time this will take will probably mean I won't get back with an adequate response until long after you're banned from 2+2 for increasingly worse and worse posts that bring to light how incompetent at life you are. So with that note in mind.

So long!

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

[ QUOTE ]
Look here dids really made me think, and now instead of my trite making fun of him,

Op i think i shall have to hire a creative team to work on this plan of making fun of you and then deliver something that can best be described as

Literally earthshattering (like most people who say literally on the internets, its meaning here is figurative)

Don't underestimate the lengths i'm willing to go and the money i'm willing to spend to achievev this.

Only time will tell if this masterpiece of a plan will acheive fruition.

Not only can many people vouch for the fact that I'm willing to go to any lengths to make fun of a person if needed but iI have the resources as well.

Krazy Karl's is an advertising branch out of madison avenue that i think would be perfect for thinking up innovative ways of belittling you.

And hopefully they can show how useless you are and how no one cares.

Meanwhile, in reality, the amount of time this will take will be huge.

Energy expended in this, massive.

Nothing can deter me from this goal though.

The only issue I see is the amount of time this will take will probably mean I won't get back with an adequate response until long after you're banned from 2+2 for increasingly worse and worse posts that bring to light how incompetent at life you are. So with that note in mind.

So long!

[/ QUOTE ]

lolz

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with saying "lol donkaments" at everything is that pretty soon your entire world is one big donkament and then ten years later you wake up with nothing because you never took anything seriously because who can take donkaments seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

truth

romo dont listen to the haters. they cant beat $1/2 limit games

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't think there's any proof that winning vs a field with high % of bad players is any more or less difficult than winning vs a field with high % of good players. Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I know the common wisdom is that one plus one equals two, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeN3_GDWrQ8

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
 

[ QUOTE ]
When somebody makes a lousy post, which this OP sure is, let's all try and find more creative ways to inform him of that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think top-level players would disagree with you. This topic of the most thought-provoking topics in poker today.

Just because you're not a top player, and not even a very good mod, doesn't mean that a topic isn't good.

Under your incompetent overseership, NVG has nothing to do with the high-powered debate tradition of the 2p2 forums of old. Instead it's just one lol donkament after another. That actually would be fine with me, except that you choose to get involved in trashing the few good posts here that someone actually put some thought into.

What are your credentials anyway? Are you any good at poker? Are you any good at anything? Probably unemployed living with the parents. What are you now, over 30 I think? Pathetic.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

[ QUOTE ]

What are your credentials anyway? Are you any good at poker? Are you any good at anything? Probably unemployed living with the parents. What are you now, over 30 I think? Pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]


LOLInsultaments

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What are your credentials anyway? Are you any good at poker? Are you any good at anything? Probably unemployed living with the parents. What are you now, over 30 I think? Pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]


lolunemployments

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

I heard Dids bought a TV with his poker winnings.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

it's pretty amazing that you can write longwinded posts about the nature of variance and how even the most successful online player of the past year has a risk of ruin if he is not conservative with bankroll management...

...and then show a complete lack of understanding when it comes to understanding the nature of tournaments, which are run over the course of extremely few hands, with rapidly escalating blinds which determine players' actions far more than any sort of interactive mental battle, and with the field including everyone from the best players in the world to complete amateurs - meaning even something as basic as table draw plays a huge part on your chances.

given all you've said about sbrugby, who has dominated cashgames for hundreds of thousands of hands vs very tough opponents, how can you not understand that variance in tournaments is much, much, much, much greater than cashgames, and thus one person winning one isolated event can never really mean anything?

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

Larger fields, more coin flips with 200bbs=more skill. Got it.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's any proof that winning vs a field with high % of bad players is any more or less difficult than winning vs a field with high % of good players.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol donkaments

[ QUOTE ]
I think that what the modern-day WSOP ME and other big-field big-purse tournies do is spread final outcome variance significantly outside the realm many pros are comfortable with.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol donkaments

And in an ill-advised moment of non-sarcasm, let me just say I don't think you understand what is meant by lol donkaments.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool! Following your sound logic, I am joining the NFL. I have sent a letter to the Roger Goodell's office informing him of this fact. I have informed him that I will be playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers and would be quite happy with the NFL minimum salary. And to think, I haven’t played organized football since high school! Then again, I was pretty darn good in HS, and since is no rigorous analysis proving that it is more difficult to win against good players, I should be just fine competing in the pros. Thanks OP!

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

op made my brain hurt.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

wow this is an ill-informed OP

world class players play donkaments for two reasons

1)they're full of donkeys
2)potential tv time = endorsements and other ancillary income

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

So i just got dne with the thread where busted is asking, "what isn't a donkament?", etc..

now this, LMAO

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

isn't the OP still mad that Full Tilt Pros play on Full Tilt Poker?

it's a donkament... but alot of us play them for the chance at a big score. it's like the lotto with much MUCH better odds if you are even remotely decent at poker.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool! Following your sound logic, I am joining the NFL. I have sent a letter to the Roger Goodell's office informing him of this fact. I have informed him that I will be playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers and would be quite happy with the NFL minimum salary. And to think, I haven’t played organized football since high school! Then again, I was pretty darn good in HS, and since is no rigorous analysis proving that it is more difficult to win against good players, I should be just fine competing in the pros. Thanks OP!

[/ QUOTE ]

Where's you analysis? I don't think you have any to offer.

You argue by analogy to pro football, but pro poker is rather unlike playing in the NFL. Do you just make football analogies in your brain every time you want to analyze something? I don't think that will get you very far.

In financial markets it is well-known amongst successful players that in many types of trading it is more important to understand the "madness of the crowd" than to understand the economics and business of the underlying companies that serve as vehicles for speculation. And the same is true for tournament poker, and plays a role in analyzing player styles and guesstimating ranges and fold equity.

There is a very simple theorem in the markets: profit is proportionate to the amount of dumb money in the market. The periods of greatest profit for successful professional traders are during the expansion phases of bubbles.

By successful professional trader, I mean someone who knows how to take advantage of others ill-advised risk-taking without exposing himself to excessive risk. This is not easy and is the reason 95% of prospective traders go busto.

The same should be true in poker tournaments: there is a positive correlation between the expected profit of a tourney poker pro and the % of bad players in the tourney.

However, once again, taking advantage of bad players is not easy, due to variance of results caused by a wide range of styles amongst bad players.

I don't think it's clear at all that it's more/less difficult for a pro to win a tournament with high % of bad players than one with low %. What is clear, is that expected profit is far greater, and that's why all these guys play WSOP ME, etc.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool! Following your sound logic, I am joining the NFL. I have sent a letter to the Roger Goodell's office informing him of this fact. I have informed him that I will be playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers and would be quite happy with the NFL minimum salary. And to think, I haven’t played organized football since high school! Then again, I was pretty darn good in HS, and since is no rigorous analysis proving that it is more difficult to win against good players, I should be just fine competing in the pros. Thanks OP!

[/ QUOTE ]

Where's you analysis? I don't think you have any to offer.

You argue by analogy to pro football, but pro poker is rather unlike playing in the NFL. Do you just make football analogies in your brain every time you want to analyze something? I don't think that will get you very far.

In financial markets it is well-known amongst successful players that in many types of trading it is more important to understand the "madness of the crowd" than to understand the economics and business of the underlying companies that serve as vehicles for speculation. And the same is true for tournament poker, and plays a role in analyzing player styles and guesstimating ranges and fold equity.

There is a very simple theorem in the markets: profit is proportionate to the amount of dumb money in the market. The periods of greatest profit for successful professional traders are during the expansion phases of bubbles.

By successful professional trader, I mean someone who knows how to take advantage of others ill-advised risk-taking without exposing himself to excessive risk. This is not easy and is the reason 95% of prospective traders go busto.

The same should be true in poker tournaments: there is a positive correlation between the expected profit of a tourney poker pro and the % of bad players in the tourney.

However, once again, taking advantage of bad players is not easy, due to variance of results caused by a wide range of styles amongst bad players.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes! Time to punt!

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with saying "lol donkaments" at everything is that pretty soon your entire world is one big donkament and then ten years later you wake up with nothing because you never took anything seriously because who can take donkaments seriously.


[/ QUOTE ]

By god, it's like you totally know me.
Has it been ten years already? Where the donk did the time go?
My world IS one big donkament, and like this very morning, I did wake with nothing.

Is it really becuse I took nothing seriously?

Dang me, vanity, pride, and bitter donkness, dang me.

Maybe, just maybe, your piercing ray of truth can help to shatter this donkness that has enveloped me. From this day forward, I pledge to view the world and everything in it, as a serious tournament, made up of important choices.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
 

[ QUOTE ]

Under your incompetent overseership, NVG has nothing to do with the high-powered debate tradition of the 2p2 forums of old. Instead it's just one lol donkament after another. That actually would be fine with me, except that you choose to get involved in trashing the few good posts here that someone actually put some thought into.



[/ QUOTE ]

When you make posts like this, and have a regged date in 2007, it makes me want to figure out who your old account was and why it got banned.

Your op is 5000000 words of stupid. Sorry.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
 

The ME is not just a donkament, Santa is not just a guy who breaks into other people's houses...

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

is it just me or is this guy indiana?

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Under your incompetent overseership, NVG has nothing to do with the high-powered debate tradition of the 2p2 forums of old. Instead it's just one lol donkament after another. That actually would be fine with me, except that you choose to get involved in trashing the few good posts here that someone actually put some thought into.



[/ QUOTE ]

When you make posts like this, and have a regged date in 2007, it makes me want to figure out who your old account was and why it got banned.

Your op is 5000000 words of stupid. Sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

and not to mention a huge waste of time

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

Bustedromo is the worst poster on 2+2 without a doubt.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

more love for my genius please, GA can't be the only one to comprehend my brilliance, ty.

Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
 

Obviously you don't know the etymology of "Donkament"

Donk = DONK. Duh.
'ament" = Tournament

There are more donks in the WSOP ME than any other major tournament. Therefore not only is the WSOP ME a donkament, but it is the king of donkaments.

Also, for a reasonable proof: Jerry Yang won this year.

Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
 

In financial markets it is well-known amongst successful players that in many types of trading it is more important to understand the "madness of the crowd" than to understand the economics and business of the underlying companies that serve as vehicles for speculation. And the same is true for tournament poker, and plays a role in analyzing player styles and guesstimating ranges and fold equity.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is just another way of saying that some market players believe in martet timing. Since you go on to say that 95% of these people go broke, I'm not sure what your point is, although I suspect you underestimate the percentage of market timers who end up broke. Even if you are right, though, since much fewer than 95% of the market players who pay primary attention to market fundamentals go broke, I'm doubly confused as to what your point is.

--Zetack