Eph2008

vince van patten is probably the coolest guy on tv

Please share

Who's got it?I want it and I already have an account.Anyone have the hookup?

DN is the frign man!

Shut up and read something for once.... **** the South. **** 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.And now what do we get? We're the ****ing Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?Cause we ****ing founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they

That sucks. gg bro.

I get the same feeling about your Pulp fiction quote.

I don't know where you get off calling kathy liebert, who was the foremost woman in poker before espn started doing features on annie duke, lucky. But there is no way you are remotely correct in this. Poker shows on TV are EDITED. Look at the facts:Liebert is #2 on womens all time list.http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/rank.php?a=r&n=137#47 on the regular all time list.http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/rank.php?a=r&n=1

Forrest is the best in the world at stud and razz. And that hand with Forrest and Chad brown did go to a showdown, Brown bet every round. Also Brown was the one with the high cards, not Forrest.

He's not the most photogenic FT rep, so this may be offbase, but here goes....So he can go on a tv commercial and say "I play on FullTilt Dot Net to tweak my game and so should you", or something to that effect. Or so someone on FT who is more photogenic can go on tv and say "WeOn the other hand, less cynically, the fact of the matter is he is being paid a lot of money to play on FT, and increasing the player base is the point of his (and the other names) sponsorship. what, in the name of god, are you talking about? none of that made sense to me, but going off on "photogenic" stuff and I, we

it's not realistic long term, but it's necessary to vastly underestimate your winnings when the short term can have an effect on your lifestyle.if you can lose one 900 dollar pot, you can lose 3 in a bad day, 10 in a bad week. you have to be prepared for that. it's good that elkang can shrug one such loss off, but if poker becomes a career, one needs to be able to shrug off at least a week of bad beats. they happen, and they hurt worse in NL than they do in limit. shrugging off 900 is one thing. shrugging off a 9k week is something else entirely.Definitely true. But is it common practice to ju

$200 NL mostly online. Limit around $1/2 usually for bonuses. Multitable usually. Now single tabling as I'm going over web and WSOP stuff. Live I still play baby $1/2 and $6/12 Limit. I only play Hold'Em.I will add SnG and many more MTT tourneys to my playlist again along side with the cash game grind. I think that's a good fit for my state of mind.This is based on my skill set, my bankroll and what I find to be the most lucrative games.i hope this doesn't come off as rude, but i wouldn't expect to be able to make a long term living at these limits. if you're going to play here, you'd better b

This guy knows whats up!haha 'It was clearly huck seed...so it was huck' hahaI agree tho, Huck.