Wpt Aruba

[matt21sz 0]

I noticed something during tonight's WPT in Aruba. Could it be that the reason some/many pros dislike online "amateurs" isn't their maniacal play, but their behavior and etiquette instead? Online amateur Josh Schlein played wonderful, aggressive poker in his second place finish to Freddy Deeb. And save for a brutal beat on the river, he would have won the tournament. What bothered me was they way he conducted himself at the table. Every other hand it seemed, he was pounding the table, slapping the table, talking to players during hands he was not even involved in. During one hand, Johan Storakers was in the midst of getting re-raised by Freddy Deeb....and Josh Schlein started asking him if he won some European Player of the Year award or something. Storakers face was classic, looked like he wanted to smack the kid upside the head. Enough with my rant, but I'd like to think that if any of us on this forum, myself included, were to ever play amongst pros, or even just at our local casino, would behave a little more proffessionally. Anyone have similar thoughts?? Could this be the reaon so many pros seem to despise the online crowd?? Or am I losing my mind. Flame away if need be.

[Swift_Psycho 1]

I believe this has been brought up before, but yes I agree that poor etiquette is probably part of it. Josh was definitely more than a little annoying.

[wellsberry 0]

The kid was definitely a jerk. I think it was just an immaturity thing.

[Ralphy 0]

josh needed a good smack across the chops. either that or he needs some heavy duty horse tranquilizers.

[Bubba83 0]

Agreed, and I don't think he played well at all. And Freddy should have been able to read his very obvious emotions/actions better than he did.

[wsox8 10]

he annoyed me but not as much as Tony G did

[Jordan 1]

Agreed, and I don't think he played well at all. And Freddy should have been able to read his very obvious emotions/actions better than he did.

lolololol.didn't play well at all? wow. were you there looking at his hole cards.seriously. why are some people so ignorant on this forum, and in general.you know nothing of this young player.- Jordan

[Bubba83 0]

How am I ignorant? I said I don't think he played well in the hands they showed, and his actions/antics completely gave him away if Freddy would have paid more attention in particular on the hand where he had Q 9 with the two pair and Freddy had the pair of 4s.Did you notice when he bluffed Devin that he verbally declared his bets very quick when he was bluffing, then again verbally declared his raises when he bluffed heads up? Yet when he'd flop a big hand he'd just put a chip amount in very quick without saying anything.This kid looked like one of those idiots who is out to prove something everytime he gets dealt one of the worst hands in poker, he was just extremely lucky no one had any semblance of a hand when he did this. I'm sure it made him feel invincible/on top of the world, though.

[suicideking 0]

I missed it. What happened?

[alf13 0]

If you go by what was showed tonight...yeah...the kid played bad and was a pretty big tell bag.

[Jordan 1]

wow

[alf13 0]

wow

Dude...only by what was showed.The guy might be the best holdem player on the planet for all I know...but tonight...he didn't play all that well.check...call...check...call....raise with A9...check it down...wtf?

[Alex916F 0]

I do agree that he was showing all of the classic signs of whether he was bluffing or had a monster. However, the places he chose to bluff seemed like very intellgent places to bluff. The hand that stuck out to me is when he had 73 and the other person ended up with a 7 high flush with the board paired and plenty of potentially higher flush cards in josh's hand. Even though Josh was doing the classic strong is weak with a fake yawn every 5 seconds the situation the dude was in was just too difficult. The guy had his tourny life on the line not Josh's and even if he had the nut flush he would be scared of the boat..... just saying

[matt21sz 0]

I do agree that he was showing all of the classic signs of whether he was bluffing or had a monster. However, the places he chose to bluff seemed like very intellgent places to bluff. The hand that stuck out to me is when he had 73 and the other person ended up with a 7 high flush with the board paired and plenty of potentially higher flush cards in josh's hand. Even though Josh was doing the classic strong is weak with a fake yawn every 5 seconds the situation the dude was in was just too difficult. The guy had his tourny life on the line not Josh's and even if he had the nut flush he would be scared of the boat..... just saying

I noticed that too....the fake yawn only showed up on his bluffs. Then again, I had a slight benefit of seeing his holecards.

[Jrobb25 0]

The kid was definitely a jerk. I think it was just an immaturity thing.

The Kid is 20 years old...give him a break.

[alf13 0]

The fake yawns were a bit much...and yes...he is 20 years old so he has some growing up to do.How bout: "You slow rollin' me freddy?" WTF???? OrTalking to everybody during the play of their hands...especially after the swede gets re-raised and this douchebag wants to ask him if he was european poker player of the year.I think he will wake up 5 years from now and say..."Why the **** did I call with 33 in that spot?"talk about a gamble...if he was trying to setup his table image for the future...it worked.....

[Wandigo 1]

I love near the end when he bluffed and made the $400,000 bet after the flop, he just says "four-hundred" and doesn't put them in the pot. Maybe he thought he was still online and the dealer would do all that for him haha

[Billy 0]

From the hands shown on TV, I actually thought he was playing well. His table image was good, kind of resembled a DN-like style where he's just having fun at the table. But that last call with the 3's was a little too much and it seemed like he was just trying to macho up with that one.

[Busted Flush 0]

I guess I can understand if people balk at Josh Schlein's etiquette at the table; and I think he's going to have to cut down on the physical tells now that people know the hands that match the expressions. What I don't understand is how anyone couldn't be wowed by his performance, which to me was so brilliant that it makes me want to quit playing altogether. Just for the 7-3 hand alone: He calls on every street with no pair and no draw, then jams on the river with four to a flush on the board. That takes serious guts, not to mention an uncanny ability to read his opponent.What's more, can anyone give an example in which he misread an opponent? Yeah, me neither. Outside of the AK on the sixth place finisher, he wasn't dealt a single big hand all night-- that 3-3 at the end was his only PP, if I recall correctly-- and yet he exploited the other players' weakness at every opportunity and usually got paid off when he had the best of it. The way he was crushing Freddy Deeb heads-up, I suppose you can blame him for calling with the threes, even though he sensed correctly that it was a coinflip situation-- but hey, the kid's 20, he was running good, and he was a little anxious to take down the tournament. On his blog recently, Matt Matros marveled at the kids who were ruling the PokerStars event this year in the Bahamas, another place where you don't have to be 21. He said that they're finding extremely creative ways to accumulate chips in these tournaments. I think once this new generation of underaged, online poker players get a little older, they're pretty much going to revolutionize the game. Compared to Mr. Schlein, they all looked like dinosaurs out there in my opinion. He gave a clinic in how to win with loose-aggressive play.But yeah, the kid's kind of obnoxious. Scott

[Bubba83 0]

To be honest, I think his bluffs like the one with the 7 3 had nothing to do with any "reads" he got off his opponents. I think he had planned to do it no matter what and was fortunate his opponents never had hands. The play with 7 3 sure would have looked a whole lot stupider if his opponent had Ks 4d or something of that nature.That said, I don't think his play there was bad, I just don't think he has these "perfect" reading abilities some people are saying, he just chose to try this bluff that will work a good portion of the time and it worked this time.

[Butcho22 0]

I didn't watch this but......DID THIS DUMBASSSS REALLY CALL WITH EVEN STACKS ALL IN WITH 33?

[Busted Flush 0]

To be honest, I think his bluffs like the one with the 7 3 had nothing to do with any "reads" he got off his opponents. I think he had planned to do it no matter what and was fortunate his opponents never had hands. The play with 7 3 sure would have looked a whole lot stupider if his opponent had Ks 4d or something of that nature.That said, I don't think his play there was bad, I just don't think he has these "perfect" reading abilities some people are saying, he just chose to try this bluff that will work a good portion of the time and it worked this time.

Well, let's break this hand down a bit: It's blind vs. blind, with SB limping and the BB checking with the same hand. I think Josh has to be thinking that Devin has a junk hand; granted, that junk hand could include a high spade, in which case his read is wrong. But the flop came with a lot of low cards and Josh had position, so by the time the board filled out with four spades, Josh could feel reasonably confident that (a) any spade the Devin has will be too weak to call an all-in and (B) that his cold-calling of bets on the flop and the turn could make it seem plausible to Devin that he was on a draw. I think Josh sold that bluff extremely well, personally.And really, nobody has perfect reading abilities, so I definitely won't make that claim for Josh. I still think he played brilliantly, though; along with Kenna James a couple weeks ago, I think he played better than anyone I've see this season on the WPT. (Though I missed Week One. Damn dysfunctional TiVo!)Scott

[hank213 1,823]

I think Josh played well. He made some good, creative decisions (final hand excluded). And, yes, his inexperience at live play showed with his weak/strong tells. Admittedly, I was only half-watching/half-playing the godfather, but it seems like most of his bluff attempts were successful and he didn't have to show down. Thus, it was hard for those at the table to put it together. Sure, it's easy to armchair quarterback when we KNOW he's bluffing, but I don't think I'd risk half a mill or so in payout on a weak, mostly unsubstantiated hunch. As far as the OP is concerned, yes, behavior like that is one reason that primarily live-game players tend to frown on internet players at the table. As an aside, I enjoyed watching Josh squirm through the final hand. It was like he was uncomfortable in his own skin. Afterall, how many times have we all been doing that on the inside?

[CobaltBlue 662]

Personally, I thought he played well and was rooting for him. Part of me misremembered the tournament, forgetting that Deeb had won. Don't get me wrong...Deeb's amusing. However, Josh was playing pretty well and was fairly entertaining, even if he came off as a bit of a nerd.As for that big hand with Devin...Devin made a terrible bet on that river. It was an easy check/call in that situation.

[Army Eye 0]

And save for a brutal beat on the river, he would have won the tournament.

Yikes man.. it's not a bad beat to lose a coinflip