P P L Draft/teams

[ButTheyWereSuited.com 0]

How is Men Nguyen in there as one of the top 64 players in the world? I wish there was a mix of the online professionals, like Sagstrom, Abba, Gandi, etc.

this is one of the most ignorant comments i have seen in this forum.just go on hendon, go on card player, go on poker pages.. any place that has tournament results- you will see the incredible track record in tournaments men has.he is perhaps top 5 tournament hold em players in the world and has been for years...

[nutzbuster 7]

Thanks for that but I have to correct the bit you quoted that and attributed to me but it was actually "nutzbuster" who was quoting me in a follow up post to my previous one but its no big deal.I actually know some of the principals behind this league very well but do not believe that I am ready just yet to justify being included in the 64 but would hope to have some involvement at some future time. (Doesn't mean I didn't want an invite though becaseu I reckon it would have improved my game playing against this lot week in week out).However there are a few players whom I believe should not have been included for various reasons as I fail to see their appeal but as I said previously it is important for this to be a success and there will never EVER be total agreement on who should and should not be included.

Who should or shouldn't be in will always intitiate endless debate for sure. Hope to see you as well as a few others in there mixing it up next time rouund Harry. And I agree that the creation of the PPL will create the next new chapter in moving professional poker forward. Good luck to all (but a little more to the professionals)

[socalpoker_j 1]

this is one of the most ignorant comments i have seen in this forum.just go on hendon, go on card player, go on poker pages.. any place that has tournament results- you will see the incredible track record in tournaments men has.he is perhaps top 5 tournament hold em players in the world and has been for years...

I politely disagree on a few counts... First off, you must not read much of what is on the forums. Second, I think there are a number of players that are better suited for this format than Men Nguyen or a few of the other players that have been included in this "Top 64", the examples I listed represent a younger, more dynamic guard of players that I personally would like to see involved because I believe they would make it a very entertaining event to watch. I never questioned his tournament credentials, I just feel like there are better, more appealing, and entertaining players than Men Nguyen.

[HarryDemetriou 0]

I politely disagree on a few counts... First off, you must not read much of what is on the forums. Second, I think there are a number of players that are better suited for this format than Men Nguyen or a few of the other players that have been included in this "Top 64", the examples I listed represent a younger, more dynamic guard of players that I personally would like to see involved because I believe they would make it a very entertaining event to watch. I never questioned his tournament credentials, I just feel like there are better, more appealing, and entertaining players than Men Nguyen.

Men is defintiely a Master when it comes to his tournament performances and poker abilities but as to his likeable entertaining nature I would have to agree and disagree.He starts off being nice but as he consumes more and more alcohol he reaches a point where he is worse than obnoxious.I think the key to him is to limit his alcohol consumption and as long as he hasn't had too much he is a very amiable/likeable fellow.He also does a lot or charitable work back home in Vietnam too which doesn't get too much publicity. so he can't be all bad.However I would have to say he has every right to be amongst the 64 as his tournament performances and Card Player of The Year Titles have earned him his spot.

[mr_english 0]

Men is defintiely a Master when it comes to his tournament performances and poker abilities but as to his likeable entertaining nature I would have to agree and disagree.He starts off being nice but as he consumes more and more alcohol he reaches a point where he is worse than obnoxious.I think the key to him is to limit his alcohol consumption and as long as he hasn't had too much he is a very amiable/likeable fellow.He also does a lot or charitable work back home in Vietnam too which doesn't get too much publicity. so he can't be all bad.However I would have to say he has every right to be amongst the 64 as his tournament performances and Card Player of The Year Titles have earned him his spot.

Just the chance to see him snort beer across the table is almost enough to keep him on the 64 list

[socalpoker_j 1]

Men is defintiely a Master when it comes to his tournament performances and poker abilities but as to his likeable entertaining nature I would have to agree and disagree.He starts off being nice but as he consumes more and more alcohol he reaches a point where he is worse than obnoxious.I think the key to him is to limit his alcohol consumption and as long as he hasn't had too much he is a very amiable/likeable fellow.He also does a lot or charitable work back home in Vietnam too which doesn't get too much publicity. so he can't be all bad.However I would have to say he has every right to be amongst the 64 as his tournament performances and Card Player of The Year Titles have earned him his spot.

I defer to your expertise. I guess I'm coming from the perspective of I don't enjoy watching him play on television or his persona at all, and with the structure being set up to that of a cash game, I felt that his cash game play would not suit him well to the format. However, I never made any comments regarding his charitable work or whether he was a good guy away from the table. I would have much rather seen a player like Sammy Farha, Paul Phillips, or John Hennigan than Men. I should have worded my post in that fashion, rather than just blankly questioning why he was amongst the top 64 players (tournament) in the world.

[crowTrobot 2]

I guess I'm coming from the perspective of I don't enjoy watching him play on television

i didn't enjoy watching his 3 inch mole hair anyway.

[HarryDemetriou 0]

I defer to your expertise. I guess I'm coming from the perspective of I don't enjoy watching him play on television or his persona at all, and with the structure being set up to that of a cash game, I felt that his cash game play would not suit him well to the format. However, I never made any comments regarding his charitable work or whether he was a good guy away from the table. I would have much rather seen a player like Sammy Farha, Paul Phillips, or John Hennigan than Men. I should have worded my post in that fashion, rather than just blankly questioning why he was amongst the top 64 players (tournament) in the world.

Men isn't actually one of my personal favourites but he does has entitlements imho on his poker performances to date.If the format is such that the blinds never go up then it will definitely suit players who like to play a lot of hands (imo) as it means that they should probably get big stack to blind ratios so it actually pays to play hands like suited connectors in the hope that an opponent has Aces as you get the chance to bust them cheaply. As Men likes to play these kinds of hands he may well be suited to the format but then I do not know the format so am merely guessing.

[ButTheyWereSuited.com 0]

fair enough on the entertainment factor. that was all obviously taken into consideration, but in tracking men's results these past um, er twenty years- for anyone to question his poker merits just kinda got my goose going.socal- i was not referring to forums at all in my original post. i was referring to results pages on hendon's vast site or cp or pp tourney results. go chk out men's results on hendon mob. in all varieties of games and all sizes of fields and buy in amounts. the fact he can beat out a field of $300 buy in players or $10k buy in players- sometimes in the same week and has done so for so long proves he has more then enough credentials to be in the top 64 players in the world.harry- cheers for the comments... you have always been a voice of reason in many of your articles and posts. was a pleasure to see you have a similar opinion.

[TCTC 0]

I am sure to be flamed for what I am about to write, but I cant be the only one that feels the way I do. I have only posted a few times, but before you flame me, read my previous posts. I think my posts are well-written and informative and I have agreed with DN in a few of them, but I just dont share his enthusiasm for the PPL. Does anyone else think this PPL thing is going to be a bust? All the comments I read are "glowing" about how great the PPL is going to be once it airs. I just dont see it being anything special. I mean it cant possibly be as bad as the Fox Poker Superstars Invitational (PSI) or whatever that horrible "all-in" junk-fest was called. However, I see it being more like the Pro Poker Tour (PPT), which to me isnt as bad as the Fox PSI show, but it just doesnt seem as interesting as the WSOP or WPT telecasts. The PPT tour seemed like the PSI show in regards to it being just more unnecessary TV and they were just "promos" for the "pros" to market themselves. I really dont think added anything as far as excitement or as far as poker strategy was concerned. The PSI was an "all-in" waste of time and the PPT seemed to have alot of pros that could care less about the freeroll. Maybe I am in the minority here since all of you are saying how the PPL will revolutionize poker and how great it will be, but I just dont see it that way. However, I am amazed that I am the first and only one that has posted a negative comment on PPL. Can some of you enlighten me on why it will be "revolutionary" and "great." What am I missing and I must be missing something this apprently I am the only one that thinks the PPL is simply going to be a waste of time.The PSI and PPT to me were basically "infomercials" for the pros. All either did was make money for a few companies and make poker over-exposed. Yet the pros did both because it allowed them to further market themselves and make more money for themselves. This is great for the pros and its what capitalism is all about. All the power to them, I wouldve done it as well.The new PPL will be so exciting and different, why? I mean its just 64 randomly selected "pros" and many of the so-called top pros arent even playing. Out of the 64 pros, maybe half of them would be considered in the top 64. Of the 64 there are probably 30 or so that shouldnt even be there, but are because of their name recognition and marketability, not because of their poker skills.This is just a "glorified" cash game that will allow these "pros" to market themselves so they can become "celebrities" and for some of them its for their "ego" so they can get on tv. Again, I think its smart for these 64 players to do this since it can only make them more money by making them more marketable. If the PPL is going to be so much different that PSI or the PPT where many of the pros were indifferent, then how come it seemed that DN said many of the PPL captains such as Ivey, Reese, etc., seemed like they could care less about picking their team? The only one that seemed to get into it was DN.I think the WSOP and WPT telecasts are so good because with some luck anyone can make a final table appearance. They are inclusive, not exclusive and I think thats the appeal for most of the people that watch poker on tv. Maybe I am way off on this, but instead of simply hearing how great the PPL is going to be can some of you explain exactly why? I'd really like to hear some of the reasons behind this way of thinking. Like always, let me say that I am sorry for such a long post. I think all of my posts, all 4 or 5 of them(lol), all are long.TCTC

[showstopper24 0]

i think it won't be like psi or the ppt.It will be like a cool version of hsp becuase of the cash game format.

[nutzbuster 7]

I am sure to be flamed for what I am about to write, but I cant be the only one that feels the way I do. I have only posted a few times, but before you flame me, read my previous posts. I think my posts are well-written and informative and I have agreed with DN in a few of them, but I just dont share his enthusiasm for the PPL. Does anyone else think this PPL thing is going to be a bust? All the comments I read are "glowing" about how great the PPL is going to be once it airs. I just dont see it being anything special.

Well, obviously it's success remains to be seen, but most of the people involved here are very experienced in the broadcasting aspect of high level poker and know very well what works and what doesn't. One has to believe they are aware of all the failures of past shows and will avoid them. I think this is going to be a winner and I have a very high initial expectation that it will be very well done...from the level and quality of play and they way down to the production value.Plus, the Venetian is committed to the point that they are willing to develop an arena like setting exclusively for this league. My guess is many got together and indentified all the aspects of the most successful shows (HSP, WPT, WSOP and the Heads Up on NBC), and what we'll see (hopefully) is a blending of the best aspects of all those other shows.If this is as good as advertised, then this will without a doubt be next big thing in poker.

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

In theory, it seems like a wonderful idea, TC. We'll see how that theory evolves in it's practice.

[Brunswick14 0]

Imo it is nothing like the PPT or PSI because of the fact that these 8 players are working as a team against the other teams just as in basketball or football. Which I think is a great twist to the game. I guess it's just a matter of opinion or wheather or not you like working with a team. It's definetely a BIG change but I think it will work out good. Brunswick14

[socalpoker_j 1]

Edit: Post Deleted

[CrazyJoe 0]

Imo it is nothing like the PPT or PSI because of the fact that these 8 players are working as a team against the other teams just as in basketball or football. Which I think is a great twist to the game. I guess it's just a matter of opinion or wheather or not you like working with a team. It's definetely a BIG change but I think it will work out good. Brunswick14

it's not really like that. It's individual performance added together to create the team, teammates wont be at the same table with each other, so they don't "play together" like in basketball or football. The team dynamic may come into play behind the scenes, but during play, it's solo all the way

[showstopper24 0]

it's not really like that. It's individual performance added together to create the team, teammates wont be at the same table with each other, so they don't "play together" like in basketball or football. The team dynamic may come into play behind the scenes, but during play, it's solo all the way

thats the cool part. its kind of like high school golf.if was a 'team sport' but you don't play with your teammates, you play by yourself and that score counts. your teammates may give you tips and pointers, but its all you

[SoCooLBob 0]

http://www.pplpoker.com/Professional Poker League CorporateDevelopment Site For more information and access contact:XXXXX XXXXXX ??????

[showstopper24 0]

http://www.pplpoker.com/Professional Poker League CorporateDevelopment Site For more information and access contact:XXXXX XXXXXX ??????

XXXXX XXXXXX-i tired it and nobody answered