?4daniel

[Silly_11 0]

different senario..... lets compare apples and apples not apples and mangos. seriously

[Vatche 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

[KingAustin 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

I actually did respond, but you seemed to have overlooked it. Go back and read.

[Vatche 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

I actually did respond, but you seemed to have overlooked it. Go back and read.

1st of all, i didnt quote u...so i dont know y u took it directly...second of all, u were the 1st 1 to comment on my typing.

[Devilkin 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

I believe it's generally difficult to take someone that posts like this seriously.If you want serious answers, post like an adult. Baby talk gets ya nowhere.

[InertGrudge 0]

The point of his message (to me) was that the money should be distributed fairly. He had just as much claim as anyone to the 2004 TOC, since he was the player of the year. This year, they had clear guidelines as to who qualifies, so there shouldn't be any question. However, everyone that did qualify was bumped down by 3 people who didn't, which is the whole fairness point. Adding 29 bracelets to a tourney chops down everyone's equity significantly.

3 people dont chop down any1s equity significantly...as far as last year, im not questiong about him deserving to be there...i was just wondering how he felt for taking som1s spot...som1 was promised, and then lied to...but we didnt hear anty complains from daniel on that players behalf

Here's a real answer to this post of yours: you are wrong. While I would agree that adding 3 random people wouldn't cut down too greatly on anyone's equity (although, literally it does), adding 3 people named Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan, and Phil Hellmuth to the field does chop down everyone's equity significantly. Why? Because they are arguably the three best (or three of the best)tournament no limit hold'em players out there. They weren't supposed to get in, and now there they are. They are absolute monsters at the table, plain and simple. If I had the choice of playing against Doyle or not playing against Doyle, I would choose the former because I know I would have a better shot. Plain and simple, adding those 3 players to the field does indeed cut down the equity of every player. Not only that, but as DN pointed out, it does literally cut down the equity of each player in terms of dollar amounts.Now you can quit bitching and respond to an argument like a grown-up.

[blueodum 0]

3 people dont chop down any1s equity significantly.In that case, Greg Raymer would like to come to your house, take $500 out of your wallet and give you back the wallet. Is that okay with you?(See 2+2 thread in "World Poker Tour and other Televised Tournaments" forum)http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=3878939&page=0&vc=1://http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...=0&vc=1

[silvergoose 0]

Everyone hail the Grammar Nazi.http://www.queenofwands.net/d/20020925.html"IPH JOO C@N RE4D THIS, YOU'R3 4 FUC|<IN9 |/|ORO||"I have no other useful remarks to make on this thread.

[Vatche 0]

Here's a real answer to this post of yours: you are wrong. While I would agree that adding 3 random people wouldn't cut down too greatly on anyone's equity (although, literally it does), adding 3 people named Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan, and Phil Hellmuth to the field does chop down everyone's equity significantly. Why? Because they are arguably the three best (or three of the best)tournament no limit hold'em players out there. They weren't supposed to get in, and now there they are. They are absolute monsters at the table, plain and simple. If I had the choice of playing against Doyle or not playing against Doyle, I would choose the former because I know I would have a better shot. Plain and simple, adding those 3 players to the field does indeed cut down the equity of every player. Not only that, but as DN pointed out, it does literally cut down the equity of each player in terms of dollar amounts. Now you can quit bitching and respond to an argument like a grown-up.good post...ur right, adding those three is a lot different then adding 3 random poiker players....y dont u try giving me a real answer on my original post?

[wilheldp 0]

u say that u would have not have played in the TOC if u were asked because u like to "sleep at night"....but last year u were NOT one of the chosen palyers to participate in the TOC....but after a few complaints you got ur spot(equity of 200000)dont get me wrong, harrahs completly messed up by not having u in originally, u were the wsop player of the year and u deserved it...but how did u sleep at nioght knowing u took som1s spot? u didnt complain on behalf of player x(whoevers spot u took) for being lied to.

I have nothing to add, but talking like the selections that are bolded is really, really annoying.

You forgot the title..."?4Daniel"

[KingAustin 0]

u say that u would have not have played in the TOC if u were asked because u like to "sleep at night"....but last year u were NOT one of the chosen palyers to participate in the TOC....but after a few complaints you got ur spot(equity of 200000)dont get me wrong, harrahs completly messed up by not having u in originally, u were the wsop player of the year and u deserved it...but how did u sleep at nioght knowing u took som1s spot? u didnt complain on behalf of player x(whoevers spot u took) for being lied to.

I have nothing to add, but talking like the selections that are bolded is really, really annoying.

You forgot the title..."?4Daniel"

I noticed it, but couldnt bold it.

[KingAustin 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

I actually did respond, but you seemed to have overlooked it. Go back and read.

1st of all, i didnt quote u...so i dont know y u took it directly...second of all, u were the 1st 1 to comment on my typing.

No, you didnt quote me, but you did say "people" and "they", and since I belong in those categories, I responded.Buwt chyeah, eye wuz da 1st 2 r35p0nD 2 yo awefull sp311inG h@b1t5

[tribe26 0]

every time I see vatche I think of vaginitis.........

[Golden 2]

I don't think there is much of a difference between the two.

[Vatche 0]

lolll....now i see whats going on...people are upset because they have no response for my original post, so theyve resorted to taking there anger out on my typing habbits...i love it!

I actually did respond, but you seemed to have overlooked it. Go back and read.

1st of all, i didnt quote u...so i dont know y u took it directly...second of all, u were the 1st 1 to comment on my typing.

No, you didnt quote me, but you did say "people" and "they", and since I belong in those categories, I responded.Buwt chyeah, eye wuz da 1st 2 r35p0nD 2 yo awefull sp311inG h@b1t5

u have a right to be annoyed by my typing, i guess ur the kind of guy that gets annoyed easily...anyways... next time u see a post by me, just scroll thru, it will save me and u a lot time and effort...at least weve been bumping our post counts with all this bickering. :-)

[Vatche 0]

every time I see vatche I think of vaginitis.........

thx for the support