WSOP ME is not a donkament

[AJackson]

OP clearly has way too much time on his hands. Probably better he annoy us than going on a shooting spree

[fees]

op ur a retard.. you'd fit in real nice at p5s

[bustedromo]

[ QUOTE ]
OP, Do you you really think the last 2 ME winners even have average poker skill? I'm being serious.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
No. The idea that, without any other information, the results of a tournament mean anything whatsoever is misguided.

[/ QUOTE ]

It just as easily could have been Allen Cunningham in 2006 and Scotty Nguyen in 2007. And look at the 06/07 final tables: the majority of those players cashed in other WSOP events, a number of them in final tables, even with 1sts and 2nds, and most of the players were pros (or at least claimed to be).

Typically (not always) it is rather skillful players who make it to a WSOP ME Final Table. On average, making it to a WSOP ME Final Table does imply superior skill.

[orensi]

[ 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 ]

I dont get this part.
A $500 SNG is way harder to beat than a $10 one, what " rigorous analysis" do you need here?

I only play cash games and leave the Donkaments for da' crap shooters.

[eeek]

Trying to start a discussion over this is just plain stupidity. Good players are better than bad players, the more bad players the more of an edge the good players gain, lets not use a whole page to make it a big thing yo

[NoSoup4U]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I spoke to Barry about the "lol donkaments" comment at the WSOP, he did not seem at all embarassed or to give any indication of regret. Quite to the contrary, he seemed very pleased at the outcome.

[bustedromo]

[ 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 ]

I dont get this part.
A $500 SNG is way harder to beat than a $10 one, what " rigorous analysis" do you need here?

[/ QUOTE ]

That wasn't the comparison I was referring to. I'm referring to high buy-in large-field events that attract a lot of pros. So, the question is for that type of event: Is it easier or harder to win if a high % of the players are low/no-skill ?

Presence of a high % of low/no-skill players substantially increases stack variance because ranges become much more difficult to narrow. Added variance is not necessarily what pros are looking for. On average, tournament pros deploy strategies to reduce variance and minimize role of luck. (I believe Chris Ferguson has an article on this somewhere.)

[Franchise 60]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I spoke to Barry about the "lol donkaments" comment at the WSOP, he did not seem at all embarassed or to give any indication of regret. Quite to the contrary, he seemed very pleased at the outcome.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea when has Barry said he regretted saying lol donkamanets?? OP just making things up? not like it really matters anyway, since its obvious you have no credibility to lose

[RikaKazak]

[ QUOTE ]
tldr;

LOL DONKAMENTS.

[/ QUOTE ]

[KurtSF]

OP, take it to p5s. They will love you there.