OrangeKing

Here's something to keep in mind - and I think a lot of people really don't understand this about NL cash games.If you were at that table with DN, and you had a stack of $4000, while he's sitting with $125,000 behind him...how large is his stack effectively when he's in a pot with you?The answer, of course, is $4,000.He can't use the other $121,000 against you. It does nothing. Well, maybe if you throws the chips really hard, he can bruise you...but that's really about it. From your perspective, he might as well have sat with $4,000, or $10k, 0r a million - it doesn't matter one bit, and shou

But they've seen nearly a dozen of the hands he's played on TV (chosen by ESPN), and Norman Chad says he's the tightest player around! Are you saying that's not enough for the average person to have a complete understanding of the relative skill levels of all the top pros? :roll:

Players getting better NEVER favors anyone except the players who are getting better. You win when your opponents make mistakes, not because they're playing well. I'm sure the pros, even if it took a while, have adjusted to play correctly against some of the horrible play they're seeing.And anyway, by all indications, this year's WSOP ever features the worst fields ever, by a mile.

There's more math in the game then that, but I think you're right in a sense - a lot of it is pretty hard to use once you're at the table, unless you can bring your laptop with you. I don't think the professionals think theory is silly, and I'd wager that Daniel knows (and thinks about) a lot more of the math behind poker than most people give him credit for.Edit: And in theory, you could build a computer that nobody would be able to beat in the long run, and it wouldn't have to adjust to anyone's play - it would just find the overall "optimal" play for every situation. But I wouldn't hold my

Folding in scenario 1, as many have said, is a no brainer.Folding in scenario 2 can only be done as a short stack, and even then, depends just how short you are.Blinds at 10k/20k with a 2k ante and you have 200k left? Not short enough. Same scenario, but you have 20k left? I'd say still not short enough, but we're getting closer.Same scenario, but you only have 1k left after having put in the 2k ante?In that case...you should probably fold, and move up as far as possible when several people bust out of the tournament. Even if you win if you call (assuming it's a full table and both blinds aren

It's funny how many different sports claim to be "the fastest growing sport." I think I should invent a game, keep it to myself, then teach five people how to play next year. Then I can claim a 500% increase in interest in my sport in just one year! Bam, I'm the fastest growing sport in America.

Exactly. You should loosen up in low-limit hold'em, but not nearly to the point of calling with K8o. Table composition is very important too; SSHE gets into this with the two types of tables in their starting hand recommendations (loose, which is actually the ridiculous kind of loose table you see in low-limit casino games, and "tight", which is only tight for low-limits but still rather loose, and is more like what you'd see online from the .5/1 level up).

Just to clarify, this is not the first PPT event; John Juanda won the first one at Foxwoods late in 2004 (but without a buyin, it didn't count towards the POTY race; this year, rule changes have been made so that these invitational events will count). So this would be the second PPT event, but the first of 2005.Best of luck Daniel!

Amazing performance, Daniel! Congrats, and best wishes for the holidays.

I remember looking at the WPT rules a while back - the blinds at the final table (meaning the final 6, in their lingo) are independant of the blinds in the rest of the tournament. They are set at a level that makes the average stack remaining have 40 times the big blind, then go up from there. I guess it's their way of making sure they get enough hands to tape