Alan Goerhing

[Smoothcall]

I'd be worried about my reputation if i lost to these guys.

[Qbit]

Why don't we call this forum censored news views and gossip. Lucky their is Tor Onion Server so we can just resign and use different ISPs. But this is not Vince. Sorry Alan Still would like to see the match. One of these days one of the best all around players online and live will meet you or the Hellmuth's or the Mortenson's and who ever else and there will be fireworks. Lucky for Tor Onion Server no one can really be banned from this site so Vince you can always sign if you want.

[What?]

You guys are crazy to be debating if Alan is a good tournament player. Of course he is. As far as cash games go I would imagine he would use a different strategy.

[Qbit]

He may be good the point is that none of them will be as good as Smoothcall. I would take him over any of these players. There may be only one or two that can compete with
Smoothcall. These guys have endorsements and Smoothcall has none and still makes a lot of money each month and that is a lot more then most tournament winners. Sometimes I wonder where the heads of these companies brains lie. They give endorsements to players who cannot play as good as the real good players do and then try to pump them up. The player who is really taking down the money who is also famous is not even asking for endorsements. These companies should be seeking him out. Many long time pros have not even been asked to wear a Jacket for 1000 dollars. This is why I say bring on the Goerhings, Hellmuths and the Mortensons. We shall see who the best is when they try to play Smoothcall. Smoothcall like he does to most other players in the world will destroy them and I don't care if it is a freezeout, a tournament format or a live game. Take it Limit or No Limit.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
He may be good the point is that none of them will be as good as Smoothcall. I would take him over any of these players. There may be only one or two that can compete with
Smoothcall. These guys have endorsements and Smoothcall has none and still makes a lot of money each month and that is a lot more then most tournament winners. Sometimes I wonder where the heads of these companies brains lie. They give endorsements to players who cannot play as good as the real good players do and then try to pump them up. The player who is really taking down the money who is also famous is not even asking for endorsements. These companies should be seeking him out. Many long time pros have not even been asked to wear a Jacket for 1000 dollars. This is why I say bring on the Goerhings, Hellmuths and the Mortensons. We shall see who the best is when they try to play Smoothcall. Smoothcall like he does to most other players in the world will destroy them and I don't care if it is a freezeout, a tournament format or a live game. Take it Limit or No Limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, April Fool's was LAST month.

[Qbit]

Most fools would think these players can play all real players can make chump change of these players. I am just saying bring on the match and bring on these players. It won't happen because now that they have the reputation they wont take a chance and ruin it. But I would sure like to see the match. Maybe the hypsters will realize they at these players are not as good as they say. Smoothcall is still a 2to1 favorite still one of best.

[fnord_too]

Alan,

I don't think you are outnumbered, it's just that there is no real point in participating in this thread. There are a bunch of trolls doing there thing, and a few people saying things that are not hugely insightful. (The confidence interval stuff has been beaten to death, James retated the scientice method, trolls are trolling, *yawn*).

If you started a thread (either as yourself or with another account, to keep the trolling down) on something more theoretical, I think that would be great. I know you don't want to reveal too much of your strategy, so that may not work. A thread on say cashing equity would be interesting. There have been a couple of theories on cashing equity as it relates to stack size. Have you worked on a cashing equity model or do you just intuit cashing equity when making big decisions?

Here's another (related) topic that could use a good (intelligent) discussion:
Mason has stated in one of his essays that in tournaments it is better to embrace variance early in order to mitigate it later. What are your thoughts on that idea? If you agree, when does early become later? Is early/later cyclical? Does this concept's validity wax and wane depending on skill and/or style?

I think (maybe) those are topics you can talk about without giving up too much, though again you may want to create a second account for serious discussion.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
Most fools would think these players can play all real players can make chump change of these players. I am just saying bring on the match and bring on these players. It won't happen because now that they have the reputation they wont take a chance and ruin it. But I would sure like to see the match. Maybe the hypsters will realize they at these players are not as good as they say. Smoothcall is still a 2to1 favorite still one of best.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who are you? And who is this mysterious "smoothcall" who has apparently done so well in higher-stakes games that I have yet to hear from him?

Enlighten me as to his identity and some showing of his results, and perhaps I can take you seriously.

Or are you just a buddy of his he called up to defend him on an Internet message board? Or are you Vince Lepore down the street at the Internet cafe?