|
|
#61
07-22-2007, 09:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Fixing the Main Event
I know I'm late but I have to say this is perhaps the best post I have ever read.
Why not get your forum to simply choose each winner of each WSOP event? Imagine the time saved! We can all get back to the craps tables/the pool/coked up whore, etc. Seriously - FANTASTIC. 
|
|
#62
07-22-2007, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] And just to highlight how statistically ridiculous the WSOP ME is... In reducing Poker Pros to "coin flipping monkeys": [/ QUOTE ] - More players = more hands played to go deep - More hands played to go deep = less likely players who went deep were able to luckbox their way there The entire "lolz zomg the WSOP is just a big luckbox lottery now" is entirely contradicted by the fact that, while so many entrants necessarily means the Main Event *will be* high variance, it takes much more skill to go deep in the current generation of Main Events with 5000+ players than it did even a decade ago when the Main Event only had a few hundred runners, because the players who go deep in fields with 5000+ players made so many more decisions than their predecessors did in smaller fields. [/ QUOTE ] OMG, a serious reply. >> it takes much more skill to go deep in the current generation of MEs This is a tricky area. The skill levels of the Top 10 or Top 100 players... RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE WORLD... Hasn't changed in the last 20 years. During the WSOP ME radio broadcast that I enjoyed for about 10 hours... (Though it's so "inside baseball" that only a few 1000 people might actually listen)... One Pro said, that in his estimate, ** 1 in 20 ME entrants are known Pros **. Skill becomes very secondary... When 300 Pros have to bust 5,000 amateurs. A valid way to examine a math problem is to take it to an extreme. So let's imagine... That 300 Pros join 5,000,000 amateurs at the ME. It's obvious what happens... skill now has no meaning. The more amateurs you have in the ME... The less skill matters... And it becomes a farce at some point. It was sickening when the Rio PR mouthpiece come on the broadcast... And just played everyone for a fool with his silky, smooth BS. The reason for this format is to maximize Casino profits. It's a pure form of the Lansky/Siegel strategy that built Vegas: "We will trap them in the desert... and take their money".
|
|
#63
07-22-2007, 01:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
[ QUOTE ]
OMG, a serious reply. >> it takes much more skill to go deep in the current generation of MEs This is a tricky area. The skill levels of the Top 10 or Top 100 players... RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE WORLD... Hasn't changed in the last 20 years. During the WSOP ME radio broadcast that I enjoyed for about 10 hours... (Though it's so "inside baseball" that only a few 1000 people might actually listen)... One Pro said, that in his estimate, ** 1 in 20 ME entrants are known Pros **. Skill becomes very secondary... When 300 Pros have to bust 5,000 amateurs. A valid way to examine a math problem is to take it to an extreme. So let's imagine... That 300 Pros join 5,000,000 amateurs at the ME. It's obvious what happens... skill now has no meaning. The more amateurs you have in the ME... The less skill matters... And it becomes a farce at some point. It was sickening when the Rio PR mouthpiece come on the broadcast... And just played everyone for a fool with his silky, smooth BS. The reason for this format is to maximize Casino profits. It's a pure form of the Lansky/Siegel strategy that built Vegas: "We will trap them in the desert... and take their money". [/ QUOTE ] Uh, what? Read Theory of Poker please. More players => more hands => more decisions => more opportunity for good players to exploit bad players => less opportunity for bad players to get lucky and run deep because they have to make so many decisions I'm not saying it's impossible for a bad player to get lucky and go deep and make the final table, *but* it's much less likely to happen in fields of 5000+ players where going deep necessarily involves tens thousands of hands and hundreds of decisions by each player. Skill has *more* meaning now that it did back when the fields were only hundreds of players large. This is not particularly arguable. Claiming that pros don't make final tables at the Main Event at the same ratio they did in the pre-Moneymaker days (if even true) does not mean the players who are going deep and making the final table are bad. There's also a plausible argument to be made that many of the "name pros" could be losing players and might not be that skilled to begin with, so we shouldn't expect to see them go deep in the Main Event. Sklansky has state numerous times on this forum that many "famous names" in the poker world are actually losing players. So it's entirely possible that so-called "unknowns" who make the final table are better decision makers/players than the "name" players. But yeah, you're right to note it's surprising I made a seriously reply here, because it's doubtful it was worth my effort.
|
|
#64
07-22-2007, 02:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
I bet OP was a hall monitor in school.
|
|
#65
07-22-2007, 03:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
RedManPlus, since you're so interested in fairness, why did you make such a point of charisma? How the fark is this even a relevant issue? It may be a televised event, but the money comes from players. Who cares about charisma? How about winning poker?
|
|
#66
07-22-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
Wait, will there be equal numbers in the A and B divisions? Otherwise, the awesome pro who survives the group of the 100-200 bestest pros ever in the world gets put at the final table with the crappy crap amateurs who have to beat 6000 people. Sweet deal for $8 million.
|
|
#67
07-25-2007, 12:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This is honestly the worst post I have ever read. [/ QUOTE ] QFT [/ QUOTE ] I'll 3rd that. Maybe the worst post I've ever read in this section. [/ QUOTE ] wow, add me to the list plzkthx [/ QUOTE ] 5th! [/ QUOTE ] 6th
|
|
#70
07-25-2007, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Fixing the Main Event
This is too hard for the poker pros. Beating 6,000 amateurs is probably easier than beating 8 pros. Of the 6,000 amateurs, at least 5,500 of them are dead money. That equals $55 million dollars in dead money. Now contrast that with the poker pros, where they are so good the money is negative living money. So each pro is actually losing money just sitting at the table.
So the people in "group A" have basically no chance of making the sweet 16, while the amateurs in group B are getting over $1 million dollars in dead money each, and pretty much are a lock for the final table. Does this sound fair to the poker pros? I think not.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
