How Many Of Say The Last 15 Wsop Me Champions Do You Say Were Flukes?

[Nimue1995 1]

I'm just curious who all you think really deserved to win and how many just got lucky so deserve poker oblivion? There's several I could name but I'm just curious who would be on you all's list?

[Snamuh 0]

First.

[troyomac 0]

15

[Painter567 0]

First.

[zimmer4141 0]

15

[PMJackson21 0]

I'm just curious who all you think really deserved to win and how many just got lucky so deserve poker oblivion? There's several I could name but I'm just curious who would be on you all's list?

Generally, every tournament I have won I have got lucky, and the tournaments where I felt like I played perfectly, I haven't. There really is no such thing as 'deserving to win' in tournament poker. By nature, you are going to have to get lucky in multiple ways to even sniff the FT of a tournament, so I wouldn't hold 'getting lucky' against any of the ME winners.That being said:VarkonyiMoneymakerYangGoldEvery other ME winner in the last 15 years has at least justified their title with more success. The case could be made for Moneymaker I suppose, since he did have a WPT 2nd place finish at Bay 101 not too long after the WSOP. Varkonyi is the poster boy for WSOP flukes.

[SlapStick 0]

VarkonyiMoneymakerYangGold

God, not luck

[copernicus 0]

Generally, every tournament I have won I have got lucky, and the tournaments where I felt like I played perfectly, I haven't. There really is no such thing as 'deserving to win' in tournament poker. By nature, you are going to have to get lucky in multiple ways to even sniff the FT of a tournament, so I wouldn't hold 'getting lucky' against any of the ME winners.That being said:VarkonyiMoneymakerYangGoldEvery other ME winner in the last 15 years has at least justified their title with more success. The case could be made for Moneymaker I suppose, since he did have a WPT 2nd place finish at Bay 101 not too long after the WSOP. Varkonyi is the poster boy for WSOP flukes.

QFT pretty much but.........Ohnoz, you said the V word. There is a fine line between "getting lucky" and "not getting unlucky". Eg. You get it all in PF with AA vs KK, villain flops a K and you River an A. Did you get lucky? Start ahead, finish ahead? Once the money is all in order doesnt matter, there is no flop/turn/river, just 5 cards?The decent scores Ive made (too few dammit) have generally been through not getting unlucky, especially after the first few levels.Gold had awesome cards, but he also made the most of them...maybe "illegally" since some of his table talk clearly was beyond the rules.

[NoSup4U 0]

Generally, every tournament I have won I have got lucky, and the tournaments where I felt like I played perfectly, I haven't. There really is no such thing as 'deserving to win' in tournament poker. By nature, you are going to have to get lucky in multiple ways to even sniff the FT of a tournament, so I wouldn't hold 'getting lucky' against any of the ME winners.That being said:VarkonyiMoneymakerYangGoldEvery other ME winner in the last 15 years has at least justified their title with more success. The case could be made for Moneymaker I suppose, since he did have a WPT 2nd place finish at Bay 101 not too long after the WSOP. Varkonyi is the poster boy for WSOP flukes.

I don't think anyone that wins ever really deserves it, in the sense that they are nver the person that played the 'best' out of the thousands of people that started. But if the OP means 'how many of the past 15 were actually good players and not lucky donks' then I agree :)I actually think Moneymaker deserves more praise than he gets. He was a nobody that played pretty fearlessly imo, which is hard to do. He also has had some moderate success since then, and has had at least 3 really high profile suckouts kill him for a lot of chips in big tourneys. He was a donk when he won it all, but I think he gets less credit than he deserves now a days. (not that he's great or anything I don't think, just he's thought of as poorly as Gold is)Mark

[copernicus 0]

BTW, whatever happened to Raymer's book? 2+2 blocked him in the search function (or killed threads he was in?), supposedly because he was writing one for them.Of the unknowns when they won, I think he's clearly the best of them.

[PMJackson21 0]

QFT pretty much but.........Ohnoz, you said the V word. There is a fine line between "getting lucky" and "not getting unlucky". Eg. You get it all in PF with AA vs KK, villain flops a K and you River an A. Did you get lucky? Start ahead, finish ahead? Once the money is all in order doesnt matter, there is no flop/turn/river, just 5 cards?The decent scores Ive made (too few dammit) have generally been through not getting unlucky, especially after the first few levels.Gold had awesome cards, but he also made the most of them...maybe "illegally" since some of his table talk clearly was beyond the rules.

Agreed; not getting unlucky is incredibly important, especially for a nit like me. The more aggressive you are, the more you need to get 'lucky', the tigher you are the more you need to avoid getting 'unlucky'.The other type of luck that is vitally important is situational luck, or at least that is what I always have referred to it as. Picking up AA and having some have KK, flopping a set vs an overpair etc. You can flop all the straights and sets you want, but if no one has a hand (or is willing to play back at you w/ out one) then you are not going to build your stack very much. The example of incredibly good situational luck I always use involves Raymer, but the year after he won when he made another deep run. IIRC, he picked up AA 4-5 times on day 2, and ran it into KK 3 times, and won big pots each time. Something like that def helps someone go deep in a MTT.

[gtycoon 0]

I think everyone who won, deserved to win because they in fact won. If you're going to call any of the last 15 flukes, you might as well call them all flukes. You have to get lucky sometimes to win any tournament really.

[CBass1724 1]

None of the past 15 winners have repeated the feat so obviously they were all lucky donks and flukes.

[Snamuh 0]

I think everyone who won, deserved to win because they in fact won. If you're going to call any of the last 15 flukes, you might as well call them all flukes. You have to get lucky sometimes to win any tournament really.

This is the worst logic ever.

[acesup85 0]

Obviously in order to win a tournament of that magnitude, with the fields as large as they are today, I would say it's almost impossible to win it twice. Even to make it through to the money now you have to go through more people than they even had in any of the MEs in the 90s. I just don't see why they have to be called flukes. Nobody ever plays perfect poker that is just a fact. It's not like any of these guys are terrible poker players. Many of them have done well in other events. As for the newer champs not doing much, they really haven't had an adequate time frame to accomplish much. Huck Seed is one of the more respected players in the game and what has he done in tournaments lately? Poker has ups and downs clearly, and to hate on some dudes for having their ups at a really good time is just stupid.

[PMJackson21 0]

Obviously in order to win a tournament of that magnitude, with the fields as large as they are today, I would say it's almost impossible to win it twice. Even to make it through to the money now you have to go through more people than they even had in any of the MEs in the 90s. I just don't see why they have to be called flukes. Nobody ever plays perfect poker that is just a fact. It's not like any of these guys are terrible poker players. Many of them have done well in other events. As for the newer champs not doing much, they really haven't had an adequate time frame to accomplish much. Huck Seed is one of the more respected players in the game and what has he done in tournaments lately? Poker has ups and downs clearly, and to hate on some dudes for having their ups at a really good time is just stupid.

All IMO of course:Robert Varkonyi is a terrible poker player. Jamie Gold played the big stack well, but is also pretty bad. Moneymaker, meh. Like Mark said, he probably gets unfairly ripped on a lot online, but that is probably because most non poker people viewed him as the torch bearer for online poker players. Yang....To be honest I paid as little attention as possible to last year's WSOP once I busted, I'm just going off what I've read and been told. I don't think it is 'hating' to critique someone's play, and I don't think you need to be a good MTT player to win a big buy in/large field MTT. On a smaller scale, this happens almost every Sunday in the online majors. If I was lucky enough to win a televised event, and in the process came off looking bad and making many, many bad plays, I would expect criticism. If that brought me down, I could just go look at my bank statement to make me feel better.

[TB17 0]

I deserve to win every tourney I play imo.

[PMJackson21 0]

I deserve to win every tourney I play imo.

Then we must never play the same tournaments, because that would be impossible...imo.

[TB17 0]

Then we must never play the same tournaments, because that would be impossible...imo.

Who said we both can't be deserving? Obviously I'm more deserving...but if I'm out you can be second in lineimo

[PMJackson21 0]

Who said we both can't be deserving?

Bax

Obviously I'm more deserving...but if I'm out you can be second in line

This doesn't sit well with me...

imo

IMO, your opinion sucks.

[looshle 6]

Leave it to Pat to make a thread serious.WTF.PS. and all that "imo" crap, STOP IT.

[jday561 0]

Gold has done pretty well after the WSOP.Moneymaker has done awful - which is what it means to be a "fluke."

[Painter567 0]

Gold has done pretty well after the WSOP.

Really?

[copernicus 0]

Gold has done pretty well after the WSOP.Moneymaker has done awful - which is what it means to be a "fluke."

He has? His cash in the WSOP Europe for 58k is Golds only significant post ME hit along with some small cashes, isnt it? Moneymaker came in 2d in the Shooting Star for 200k with about the same number of small cashes.I dont see how you can say CM is more of a fluke.

[looshle 6]

Moneymaker > Gold AINEC