help me settle an argument - jamie gold

[NNNNOOOOONAN]

I would say that he played very, very well/ran better than average during the main event. And now that he has 6 mil. or w/e the very large number of dollars it is, he's playing very badly?

It seems to me that yes, he did play quite well during the main event, I watched the PPV final table and while he did catch better than average cards, he extracted VERY well with them. The one person at the final table that did play better than him was definitely Allen Cunningham. Cunningham was also the person that he couldn't extract as much value out of because his verbosity didn't quite work the same way against him. So yes, he did run hot, but he also did a very good job of playing the hands he got.

Now that the ME is over and he has milllllions, he obviously has quite an inflated head, and overestimates his skill. He thinks that he can still play his Q,8o and K,6o type hands and outplay the competition. Now, though he's playing against much tougher opponents and it's not working out to well for him.

[slickpoppa]

He's better than Moneymaker and Varkoyni, but worse than Hachem and Raymer

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
in the long run, though, over my past 80k hands i make like 7bb/100

[/ QUOTE ]

80k isn't even close to the long run

[ImGoodToGo]

Is it just me or do people just look for something to argue about here?


anyway, another poster said it best, mentioning that against weak players, gold's style works quite well, and he can talk his oppenents into doing what he wants them to do. However, against anyone of reasonable skill, gold's whole approach seems to fall apart. A few hands agaisnt Cunningham at the final table come to mind where Allen laid down top pair to a big jamie gold hand, mainly because he could see through Gold's babble. In fact, at times his talking pretty much revealed hand (especially to such a strong player), like his "i knew you didn't have it" when gold fires out a river bet after flopping a set against Cunningham's top pair... Allen mucked pretty quickly in a spot where weak player would have stacked off most likely.

long story short, against world class players (such as on High Stakes Poker), Gold's style is a huge handicap, and i doubt he could ever be successful. Against weak/average players, gold is a solid, manipulative, winning player

[isapistola]

[ QUOTE ]
Man I love the idiots that cant detect the sarcasm in this thread

[/ QUOTE ]
fyp

[edfurlong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Man I love the idiots that point out the sarcasm in this thread

[/ QUOTE ]
fyp

[/ QUOTE ]

[Gomez]

I think he is an average player at best. He had an amazing run of luck at the WSOP. I imagine high stakes games would offer him a private jet and limo to get him in their game.

[Hey_Porter]

Given the level of "bad" many people have placed on him, being "no where near as bad" might not mean squat, but fwiw, from Negreanu's blog:

Jamie is no where near as "bad" as many people think. He is an aggressive player that is a little sloppy, but I'm not sure if Jennifer will be able to exploit some of Jamie's weakness' just yet.

[NT!]

I'm sure Daniel would love to keep Gold in his games. LOVE it.

[LBK]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure Daniel would love to keep Gold in his games. LOVE it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, from what I hear, Doyle and Company would love to keep Daniel in the game as well.