Let's talk about the '08 WSOP Main Event

[~N9NE~]

Did anyone follow the 2008 World Series of Poker Main Event final table?

Some of the worst poker plays and baddest beats I have ever seen, by a long shot. Winner ended up getting $9 mill. Ridiculous amount of money.

I won't post results to prevent spoilers.

Anyone follow the tournament? Thoughts?

You can watch the final table here if you haven't yet http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=khVu07hsPZs&feature=related

EDIT: I'm trying to get this moved back to the Pool Room, don't think it belongs in the Media Metropolis.

 

[1048576]

Poker is all luck. Always has been. Always will be.

 

[~N9NE~]

Poker is all luck. Always has been. Always will be.

Luck plays a part undoubtedly. Everyone gets lucky sometimes. But it is not all luck. Far from it.

Patience, timed aggression, calculating pot odds etc. are all vital to successful poker.

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

Poker is FAR from all luck lol.

I dont like the ESPN broadcasts but regardless I did watch it, the only plays that I could be critical of where Mr Phillips and his AK betting so weakly on that flop, and Suharto deciding nows a good time to raise with his A8, so basically the two amateurs. The others I cant be too critical of, the coverage doesnt give enough background detail to fill in alot of holes as to why they made certain moves.

 

[BASEBALLFURIES]

short term: luck wins out
long term: skill wins out
... at least thats how its generally accepted

 

[1048576]

Patience will get you blinded out.
How do you time your aggression?

Either way you look at it, if you play conservative, you need to get lucky and have good cards. If you play aggressive, you need to get lucky and have your opponents get bad cards. It's luck.

Obviously calculating pot odds is vital, and so is knowing typical betting patterns, but that information isn't hard to learn, and after that, it's all luck.

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

Betting patterns are extremely sophisticated at the highest level of play, there are several 'reverse-reverse' bluffs and bet that may look like bluffs etc., its just plain ignorant to think you could figure out someone like Phil Iveys betting patterns easily.

Theres also the task of putting a player on a range of hands(and whether or not you could beat said hands within their range) and how many hands they would make X play with thus how many times a call/raise/fold would be the right play.

Tournaments do require a good bit of luck to win in(77 vs AK will have to hold up for you more than the odds define for you to get to the final table) but even so Ivan Demidov still managed to get 3rd in the WSOPE and 2nd in the WSOP:ME. The odds of him actually getting that consistently lucky are extremely small, especially considering he didnt showdown many hands in either tournament- essentially meaning most of the hands he won he simply outplayed his opponents.

But really there is no debating it, the top players in the world do not consistantly win because they are luckier than everyone else, the odds actually defy that accusation.

 

[~N9NE~]

@ Cpt.Zeppo

How about Phillips pushing all in against Eastgate with 10 high on the J 3 4 flop. That move had me dumbfounded. When Eastgate called, Phillips asked 'Do you have the Jack?' knowing that if he did he would need runner runner. Ended up Eastgate had hit a set of threes. To push all in when Eastgate had raised pre and post flop, and seemed only to be betting with a made hand was poor. Then Phillips said 'I kept folding, I had to do something.' What a ****.

@ 1048576

People just wouldn't be able to make a sustainable living off of poker if it was all about luck.

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

Yeah haha that was awful, forgot about that one. Eastgate didnt seem to make many if any bluffs whatsoever at the final table, think hes generally the sort of player that relies on his read of the hand and yet Phillips thought f*ck this Im all in.

 

[craiigg]

Poker is all luck. Always has been. Always will be.

terrible flawed accusation, luck plays a factor but most of it is strategic, mathematical calulations based on reads/ odds(implied,pot,hand)/outs and betting patterns

 

[~N9NE~]

Anyone see when it was over Eastgate didn't even move for a good 5 seconds. As soon as Demidov turned over two pair I would have been jumping on the table and rolling in the money.

 

[Raider 88]

I couldn't believe how awful the play was at the final table. That Shuhorto guy betting 2/3 of his stack when he had no hand then folding was just terrible. So many big unnecessary bluffs. They were pretty much just handing Eastgate chips in the last 1/2hr of the show.

I was rooting for Chino all the way, but I'm alright with Eastgate winning...just glad the Phillips guy lost. Seemed like the biggest donk at the table.

Also, apparently heads up went on for about 4 hours....and ESPN shows only two hands!! Seriously, wtf ESPN. Please show it live next year.

 

[~N9NE~]

I think it was the longest final table ever or something like that so there must have periods where it was merely blinds swapping going on, but two hands is quite pathetic.

I wanted Chino to win aswell, you could see how passionate he was about it, but he did suck out several times to just even be at the final table. I felt he could have laid the pocket Jacks down against Phillips when Phillips had the queens, you could tell he knew he was dominated, he should have gone with his gut instinct. Tough call I know, but could have made a difference.

 

[1048576]

terrible flawed accusation, luck plays a factor but most of it is strategic, mathematical calulations based on reads/ odds(implied,pot,hand)/outs and betting patterns

Uh huh, what about when I have Aces and you have kings, or when I have an Ace-high flush and you have a straight flush. You can either fold with the 2nd or 3rd best hand or you can call. Your opponent's betting patters would be identical if he/she flopped a flush with 3 high as a straight flush, and they would bet Queens just like Aces preflop and after the flop if the cards are low. Face it, it's luck.

Pros win a lot because they are recognised as pros, so people are too conservative around them, and they know that. Also, some of them have lackeys donk their chips to them so they can get a big stack early.

This is really arrogant, but perhaps your definition of skill is my definition of common sense, so I don't count certain actions.

 

[Raider 88]

Uh huh, what about when I have Aces and you have kings, or when I have an Ace-high flush and you have a straight flush. You can either fold with the 2nd or 3rd best hand or you can call. Your opponent's betting patters would be identical if he/she flopped a flush with 3 high as a straight flush, and they would bet Queens just like Aces preflop and after the flop if the cards are low. Face it, it's luck.

Pros win a lot because they are recognised as pros, so people are too conservative around them, and they know that. Also, some of them have lackeys donk their chips to them so they can get a big stack early.

This is really arrogant, but perhaps your definition of skill is my definition of common sense, so I don't count certain actions.

If KK goes up against AA preflop, yeah that's bad luck. You'll likely lose your entire stack on that hand, the situation is unavoidable. You are listing all the horrible and unavoidable beats. What about re-raising a continuation bet when the board is all junk (2 5 9 or something) because you know your opponent raised preflop with AK AQ or AJ.

You also say that pot odds and knowing betting patterns are vital, but after that it's all luck...but everybody is different. The good players already know that you are picking up on their betting pattern, so they'll switch gears and trap you right when you think you know what they're doing. It's such a mind game it's unbelievable.

Your definition of why pros win is ridiculous. I guarantee you that if some average joe poker player played heads up for two months against a Prahlad Friedman or Patrik Antonius type pro, the average joe would end up losing.....a lot.

I'm curious, do you play at all?

Anyone see when it was over Eastgate didn't even move for a good 5 seconds. As soon as Demidov turned over two pair I would have been jumping on the table and rolling in the money.

Yeah seriously. I understand trying to act respectable after knocking the second place guy out...but geez show some emotion. You just won $9million dollars and became the new WSOP champ, and you are just gonna stand there?

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

Eastgate is a high stakes cash game player, his relationship with money is very different from the average human lol.

 

[grayfox]

Im Pretty Sure Poker Is All Luck I Made A Royal Flush Once And No One Can Beat That So That Means They Got Unlucky And I Got Lucky Thats Just Fact So You Guys Need To Pipe Down!

Anyways I Flop Straights All The Time But People Keep Palying Hands Like 96 Suited And Because That Makes A Flush 67% Of The Time Its Impossible To Beat Its Really Really Annoying I Hate This Game

 

[~N9NE~]

Eastgate is a high stakes cash game player, his relationship with money is very different from the average human lol.

That may be but it's not just the money (although it is frign $9 million), it's also the fact that you just became the WSOP main event champion. You beat 6000+ people to do it aswell and your name is now immortalised in poker history.

AND IT'S 9 MILLION LOL.

If Ivey/Negreanu/Hansen any other high stakes cash game pro won it I'm sure they would be celebrating more then Eastgate. His reaction was unreal. It's like he didn't knew he won it. He only moved when his friends ran at him.

 

[1048576]

If KK goes up against AA preflop, yeah that's bad luck. You'll likely lose your entire stack on that hand, the situation is unavoidable. You are listing all the horrible and unavoidable beats. What about re-raising a continuation bet when the board is all junk (2 5 9 or something) because you know your opponent raised preflop with AK AQ or AJ.

You also say that pot odds and knowing betting patterns are vital, but after that it's all luck...but everybody is different. The good players already know that you are picking up on their betting pattern, so they'll switch gears and trap you right when you think you know what they're doing. It's such a mind game it's unbelievable.

Your definition of why pros win is ridiculous. I guarantee you that if some average joe poker player played heads up for two months against a Prahlad Friedman or Patrik Antonius type pro, the average joe would end up losing.....a lot.

I'm curious, do you play at all?

Of course I play. I win way more than I lose. I've never lost consistently to any one person. Its cause I get good cards and know my pot odds. If I get bad cards for a while, I'll bluff a hand. There's no way to tell I'm bluffing because I've played so conservatively up to that point. OMG wtf hax mindgames. No, it's common sense.

The reraise is silly. Given that bet, they could just as likely have a pair. Your aggressive play means that if they have bad cards, you win, if they have good cards, they win. It's luck.