High Stakes Poker 3/14

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Sammy Farha wow up $450,000 overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

Farha's stock is rising each time I see him. He seems to make quality lay-downs when he's behind and yet knows to raise when he's barely ahead.

He seems under-rated as a cash game player. Sure he's as LAG as it gets, but damn..when you read players that well post-flop, you (he) can get away with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Underrated? Farha? Are you kidding me? He's been playing high stakes cash games for years and winning big. He's one of the best. The only reason you think he's underrated is that you probably only saw him on TV one time - on the WSOP 03.

[MikeGuz]

That is why they call it "TABLE STAKES".

[csuf_gambl0r]

i can't believe non of you have mentioned this yet.

During the part where deeb gets all pissed off, he says something like "i challanage any of you to a heads up match for any amount". he sounded like such an idiot when he said it.

[PokerGenius]

"and any amount anyone can borrow"

that was funnier

[spanshcastlemagc]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure he's as LAG as it gets, but damn..when you read players that well post-flop, you (he) can get away with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that his LAG works well against professional players along with his reads. I don't think he would win very much in a small stakes game over time with non-professional players.

[spanshcastlemagc]

BTW Sam Farha on High Stakes Poker is the most entertaining poker I've ever seen on TV.

[yskhyr]

You think Sammy can win big in the big game, but can't beat a small stakes game with amateurs?

[El Diablo]

y,

It's a lot harder to beat amateurs in smaller games than pros in the big games because you can never tell what the amateurs will do.

[Fallen Hero]

[ QUOTE ]
y,

It's a lot harder to beat amateurs in smaller games than pros in the big games because you can never tell what the amateurs will do.

[/ QUOTE ]

*sits back and enjoys the answers*