greg raymer and 2000 people live events

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

No, the difference is raymer isnt a dormat... you could sneeze on a pot harrington is in and take it down.

I really hope this is missing the (sw).If not, it might be the dumbest thing I've read on this forum.

NO sh.it! You guys forget all the raising and bluffing at the final table last year. Its clear that his strategy then and 2003 was not merely to just survive.

[Smasharoo 0]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

Raymer's lucky

[Whatever 1]

Raymer haters = funny.

[PhishForChips 0]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

Fine, I'll PM you. But I doubt you'll play me. Guys like you are all talk no action.

[cortanpeter 0]

Raymer was definately hit by the deck in the main event but he still played great. But he is obviously not as good as Varkonyi.lol

[speedz99 145]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

Fine, I'll PM you. But I doubt you'll play me. Guys like you are all talk no action.

You are the one that backs down every time this happens. I agree with Smash that the details should be agreed upon in this thread, as opposed to through PMs. I want to watch you back down in public again.By the way, one match wont show who is best. You should play a series of 5 $100 matches.

[bdams19 0]

I like the guy who insults Raymer for not playing tight. I mean cmon guys, who tries to build a chiplead in tournaments except fish who are willing to push with tens?

[speedz99 145]

The point is he hits a two outer on the riv to take the lead. He hit his hand. Would you push with 10-10? I wouldn't. So maybe that makes me a fish.ok maybe you aren't getting this: THE OTHER GUY 'HIT' HIS HAND FIRST. RAYMER WAS A FAVOURITE. THE PUSH WAS CORRECT. NOT PUSHING MAKES YOU WEAK-TIGHT. And maybe that's why he's either busted, or leading. No middle ground with Raymer. which is an excellent strategy. Look at DN. You see him finishing 5th a lot? You guys talk about rumors. The guys an a$$.yea, everyone whos ever played with the guy must be lying. I bet you aspire to look just like him too......Oh, you're 14. That explains everything.

Actually, I see Daniel not finishing in anything a lot............

thats the point genius. He either busts early or he wins. Who do you think makes more money, the guy who makes the final table every time as a shortstack or the guy who busts early most of the time, but wins when he doesnt? (hint: im comparing raymer and harrington). Most tourney payouts are top heavy, which makes a 'go big or go home' strategy optimal.

And that's MY point genius. This strategy certainly doesn't make him a great poker player. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. It's not about skill with Raymer. How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips? I think it's funny that most of you have chastised Moneymaker because of the way he won, but to me Raymer was even luckier. And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player. So yes, I would say that the guy that makes final table after final table is the much better player. Go big or go home. hahahaha

You are losing ground with every post. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. As opposed to the other top players? Yeah, they play to lose and always do best when the cards don't hit for them.How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips?It's really not that hard. I think you should go to some $1000 entry tourneys and try it. I'm sure that since it is so easy you will definately come away with some big wins. Seriously, just go all-in whenever you have halfway decent cards like you claim Raymer does. We'll talk again when you are flat broke.And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player.Would you rather win 5M by winning the WSOP main event, or 1.5M by placing 3-7 in five different events?

[happyjuggler0 0]

thats the point genius. He either busts early or he wins. Who do you think makes more money, the guy who makes the final table every time as a shortstack or the guy who busts early most of the time, but wins when he doesnt? (hint: im comparing raymer and harrington). Most tourney payouts are top heavy, which makes a 'go big or go home' strategy optimal.

Actually I am pretty sure Dan Harrington is "merely" a part-time player. This is the reason he does not win as many tourneys as DN and others. He is taking care of his real estate business and investments. One strategy or the other may or may not be better, but you can't prove that DH's is worse since he rarely plays. DH makes a good point in his first book (I have not gotten his second book. Yet.) that usually the best strategy is to do "the opposite" (like that is easy to define) of what everyone else is doing. Hardly an original thought, but still quite potent.I should think that any reasonable person would acknowledge that DH is a world class player. GR just made the final table in the most recent 2000+ entry tourney with the largest chip stack and about twice what almost all the other players have. Looks like he is also a world class player, at least in NLHE, and he plays high stakes poker in a variety of games as well. Perhaps he is world class in those too, or maybe just below world class.Sorry if I took the juice out of this silly flamefest. What a partypooper I am. :green:

[Dr_Shakes 0]

Speaking of Greg.. Did you see this sick call from last night?Date / Time: 2005-06-23 22:13:00 Title: "I'm either a genius or a moron with that call" - Greg Raymer Log: Greg Raymer makes it $22,000 to go preflop. David Slowik calls. The flop comes 10h-8s-6s. Slowik checks, and Raymer makes it $35,000. Slowik thinks for a moment, and then moves all in for about $190,000. Raymer goes into the tank, occasionally coming up to chat with Slowik, or more aptly chat at him. Slowik doesn't move, and Raymer inspects him for a while before announcing, "call." Slowik shows Qc-9c for no pair, and a double gutshot straight draw. Raymer flips up the 7c-6c, for a pair of 6's, and a gutshot. The turn brings the Kd, and Raymer's sixes are hanging on tight. The river is the 2h, and Raymer's sixes hold up, prompting a number of "What a call"'s from the crowd. Raymer wins the hand, and now has approximately $500,000 in chips. Slowik had Raymer covered so he retains a very short stack. Now that is cahones and instincts :-)

[PhishForChips 0]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

Fine, I'll PM you. But I doubt you'll play me. Guys like you are all talk no action.

You are the one that backs down every time this happens. I agree with Smash that the details should be agreed upon in this thread, as opposed to through PMs. I want to watch you back down in public again.By the way, one match wont show who is best. You should play a series of 5 $100 matches.

Uh, I have never even been challenged on here, so I'm not sure what the hell you are spouting off about.

[crowTrobot 2]

raymer needs to play a challenge match against DN so he can ask for an autograph in the middle of every hand

[IndyJoe 0]

The point is he hits a two outer on the riv to take the lead. He hit his hand. Would you push with 10-10? I wouldn't. So maybe that makes me a fish.ok maybe you aren't getting this: THE OTHER GUY 'HIT' HIS HAND FIRST. RAYMER WAS A FAVOURITE. THE PUSH WAS CORRECT. NOT PUSHING MAKES YOU WEAK-TIGHT.   And maybe that's why he's either busted, or leading. No middle ground with Raymer. which is an excellent strategy. Look at DN. You see him finishing 5th a lot?  You guys talk about rumors. The guys an a$$.yea, everyone whos ever played with the guy must be lying.  I bet you aspire to look just like him too......Oh, you're 14. That explains everything.

Actually, I see Daniel not finishing in anything a lot............

thats the point genius. He either busts early or he wins. Who do you think makes more money, the guy who makes the final table every time as a shortstack or the guy who busts early most of the time, but wins when he doesnt? (hint: im comparing raymer and harrington). Most tourney payouts are top heavy, which makes a 'go big or go home' strategy optimal.

And that's MY point genius. This strategy certainly doesn't make him a great poker player. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. It's not about skill with Raymer. How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips? I think it's funny that most of you have chastised Moneymaker because of the way he won, but to me Raymer was even luckier. And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player. So yes, I would say that the guy that makes final table after final table is the much better player. Go big or go home. hahahaha

You are losing ground with every post. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. As opposed to the other top players? Yeah, they play to lose and always do best when the cards don't hit for them.How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips?It's really not that hard. I think you should go to some $1000 entry tourneys and try it. I'm sure that since it is so easy you will definately come away with some big wins. Seriously, just go all-in whenever you have halfway decent cards like you claim Raymer does. We'll talk again when you are flat broke.And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player.Would you rather win 5M by winning the WSOP main event, or 1.5M by placing 3-7 in five different events?

lol, you seem to lack in basic comprehension skills. Other players obviously don't play to lose, but many of the very good ones don't play to bust either. Most of the top players don't like being in a coinflip situation for all their money. And that's why I don't understand at all your response saying that I should play a 1k buy in and go all in when I have a good hand (Raymer). That I would be flat broke. Exactly my point! But once every 50 tourney's, I bet I would make the final table with a huge stack. Right?And your last point, doesn't make sense either. Would I rather win $5m? Sure!!!! But does that make me a better player? NO!

[justblaze 0]

The point is he hits a two outer on the riv to take the lead. He hit his hand. Would you push with 10-10? I wouldn't. So maybe that makes me a fish.ok maybe you aren't getting this: THE OTHER GUY 'HIT' HIS HAND FIRST. RAYMER WAS A FAVOURITE. THE PUSH WAS CORRECT. NOT PUSHING MAKES YOU WEAK-TIGHT.   And maybe that's why he's either busted, or leading. No middle ground with Raymer. which is an excellent strategy. Look at DN. You see him finishing 5th a lot?  You guys talk about rumors. The guys an a$$.yea, everyone whos ever played with the guy must be lying.  I bet you aspire to look just like him too......Oh, you're 14. That explains everything.

Actually, I see Daniel not finishing in anything a lot............

thats the point genius. He either busts early or he wins. Who do you think makes more money, the guy who makes the final table every time as a shortstack or the guy who busts early most of the time, but wins when he doesnt? (hint: im comparing raymer and harrington). Most tourney payouts are top heavy, which makes a 'go big or go home' strategy optimal.

And that's MY point genius. This strategy certainly doesn't make him a great poker player. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. It's not about skill with Raymer. How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips? I think it's funny that most of you have chastised Moneymaker because of the way he won, but to me Raymer was even luckier. And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player. So yes, I would say that the guy that makes final table after final table is the much better player. Go big or go home. hahahaha

You are losing ground with every post. He plays to win, and he needs the cards to fall his way for him to do so. As opposed to the other top players? Yeah, they play to lose and always do best when the cards don't hit for them.How hard is it to push all in time after time, and win a higher percentage of flips?It's really not that hard. I think you should go to some $1000 entry tourneys and try it. I'm sure that since it is so easy you will definately come away with some big wins. Seriously, just go all-in whenever you have halfway decent cards like you claim Raymer does. We'll talk again when you are flat broke.And we weren't talking about the guy that makes the most money were we? We were discussing which one is the better player.Would you rather win 5M by winning the WSOP main event, or 1.5M by placing 3-7 in five different events?

lol, you seem to lack in basic comprehension skills. Other players obviously don't play to lose, but many of the very good ones don't play to bust either. Most of the top players don't like being in a coinflip situation for all their money. And that's why I don't understand at all your response saying that I should play a 1k buy in and go all in when I have a good hand (Raymer). That I would be flat broke. Exactly my point! But once every 50 tourney's, I bet I would make the final table with a huge stack. Right?And your last point, doesn't make sense either. Would I rather win $5m? Sure!!!! But does that make me a better player? NO!

Buddy, there is only one scale on which to judge skill in poker - MONEY. Clearly the player who wins one in 5 is better than the player who cashes 4 of 5 but never wins.

[LAPoker 0]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

Fine, I'll PM you. But I doubt you'll play me. Guys like you are all talk no action.

Wow, it is getting really quiet in here. Smash are you a pshycic or what. You said the guy would disapear, and poof. Seriously though I think its funny how out of the two or three hundred times I have seen a challange laid down, I have NEVER seen one happen. Come on Phish put your money where your mouth is, post your username so we can all come watch you get your A$$ kicked.

[justblaze 0]

Bodog. This weekend for $500 heads up. Send me a PM and i'll give you username details and we can agree to other variables. I'll be glad to play you.Nah, post it here.I'm not pming you.

Fine, I'll PM you. But I doubt you'll play me. Guys like you are all talk no action.

Wow, it is getting really quiet in here. Smash are you a pshycic or what. You said the guy would disapear, and poof. Seriously though I think its funny how out of the two or three hundred times I have seen a challange laid down, I have NEVER seen one happen. Come on Phish put your money where your mouth is, post your username so we can all come watch you get your A$$ kicked.

i think hes been hanging out with splashmaster...

[speedz99 145]

lol, you seem to lack in basic comprehension skills. Other players obviously don't play to lose, but many of the very good ones don't play to bust either. Most of the top players don't like being in a coinflip situation for all their money. And that's why I don't understand at all your response saying that I should play a 1k buy in and go all in when I have a good hand (Raymer). That I would be flat broke. Exactly my point! But once every 50 tourney's, I bet I would make the final table with a huge stack. Right? And your last point, doesn't make sense either. Would I rather win $5m? Sure!!!! But does that make me a better player? NO!I swear you get more retarded by the second. I am going to use your logic for a minute. Let's say there are 15 tournaments. Each tourney has 500 players, and here are the results for four of them.1. Wins one tourney...places 300th 14 other times2. Places 3, 4, and 5th...places 300th the other 12 time3. Places 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20th...places 300th the other 74. Places 50th every single timeBy your logic, player 4 is the best out of this group. This is why you are wrong, and a jackass.

[IndyJoe 0]

lol, you seem to lack in basic comprehension skills. Other players obviously don't play to lose, but many of the very good ones don't play to bust either. Most of the top players don't like being in a coinflip situation for all their money. And that's why I don't understand at all your response saying that I should play a 1k buy in and go all in when I have a good hand (Raymer). That I would be flat broke. Exactly my point! But once every 50 tourney's, I bet I would make the final table with a huge stack. Right?  And your last point, doesn't make sense either. Would I rather win $5m? Sure!!!! But does that make me a better player? NO!I swear you get more retarded by the second.  I am going to use your logic for a minute.  Let's say there are 15 tournaments.  Each tourney has 500 players, and here are the results for four of them.1.  Wins one tourney...places 300th 14 other times2.  Places 3, 4, and 5th...places 300th the other 12 time3.  Places 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20th...places 300th the other 74.  Places 50th every single timeBy your logic, player 4 is the best out of this group.  This is why you are wrong, and a jackass.

Exactly! I think players 2,3 & 4 are all much better players then #1. I would say number 3 is the best overall player.

[Mr. Orange 0]

I personally think that Raymer is a better player than Harrington.

Good one.

[HurricaneKyle 0]

personally think that Raymer is a better player than Harrington. He certainly has more heart. I haven't played with either one. But if I was playing in a tournament and had to pick, I would MUCH rather be playing with Harrington rather than Raymer.  I think the major difference between the two players is this. Raymer is looking to win the whole thing. And Harringtom is looking to survive. Again, these are just my thoughts and opions.

You sir, are out of your mind. Greg Raymer is only a scary player when he has a lot of chips, he'll just race you to death in coinflip situations. He is a great player, don't get me wrong but he is not a player I fear if I'm in a pot with him. He is only dangerous with a big stack.Harrington is always scary. He is one of the most intelligent players around, and you wouldn't have a clue how strong your hand is compared to his if you were in a pot with him.

[chindi 0]

You sir, are out of your mind. Greg Raymer is only a scary player when he has a lot of chips, he'll just race you to death in coinflip situations. He is a great player, don't get me wrong but he is not a player I fear if I'm in a pot with him. He is only dangerous with a big stack.Harrington is always scary. He is one of the most intelligent players around, and you wouldn't have a clue how strong your hand is compared to his if you were in a pot with him.

EXCEPT:If you're sitting at a table with Raymer, you essentially have two choices, either turtle up and avoid hands that he's in, or be as willing to put your tournament life out there on a coinflip as he is to put his.Those are your choices, and you know it ahead of time. You know every time that you put out a value bet, that Greg's willing to pull the trigger to accumulate chips early... and what's even worse, Greg's willing to do that with a wide range of hands. So at the table with Raymer, you have to be prepared to play for ALL of your chips, with little idea of where you're at.Harrington is a lot different, Harrington will take free/cheap/reasonably priced cards. Yes Dan will use his 'Action' Dan image to steal pots every now and then, and he'll slowplay the nuts now and then but with Dan there's a much lower chance of you being put into a position to call an All-in with no idea of where you are.Of the two styles the one that's most disruptive to a lot of people's game style is Raymer's... which is why so many people bitch about him. Whether or not Raymer has a monster chip stack he's going to be scary unless you have him dominated in chips.Dan is probably more dangerous, but is less scary, because Dan uses his table image well and you're more likely to get yourself in trouble with him if you don't pay attention (whereas with Raymer you're going to get in coinflips or get out).

[bocablkr 0]

Please don't flame me too bad but what does exactly does going into the tank mean as stated below? Thinking about it for a while with head down??" Raymer goes into the tank, occasionally coming up to chat with Slowik, or more aptly chat at him

[jgarza 0]

Are you retarted? Do you know anything about how Dan Harrington plays? Dan Harrington is tight-super aggresive. Sneezing on a pot post flop against Harrington will result in a rather large reraise most of the time. And when short stacked or short handed, Harrington is a mad man. Just because he plays quality hands preflop does not make him weak-tight. You are just wrong.

[bdams19 0]

Just thinking deeply about a hand for an extended period of time. Or if you're a fish going into the tank......arite im done.