Jamie Gold

[Stylin_Fish 0]

How can you sit there and say depression has nothing to do with poker results ? That is the most idiotic statement I have ever heard in my life.[bIf you aren't playing poker anymore then WTF are you doing on a poker forum.[/b]

Because I haven't played poker in a really long time and the day I cahsed out was an extremely gratifying day. I was not sad when i cashed out or depressed about it, I just said, "This ain't for me." There is a lot more luck involved in this "game" then anyone cares to admit, especially in tournaments. If poker is for you good, i hope you wins grabillions of dollars playing it.Because I choose to be, some of the people on here are cool and hysterical. If an admin chooses to ban me for some reason, then i guess i'll have to find something else to do at midnight or early in the morning before i start my day. Well I'm off to go hang out with a friend.Stay lucky peeps.

[Mercury69 3]

Riptyde is still the biggest knob on this thread.

[SwamiSwan 0]

OMFG not another one. You idiot there are MANY people out there making a consistent living playing poker. Any seasoned player will tell you that in the long run poker is 80% skill 20% luck. "All luck, all suckouts" jesus please stop being a whiner, and learn how to play pokerROFL (posts like these crack me up)

Well, shleprock, why do you have to use 'put downs' to strengthen your argument? its weak.. Your going to say in tournament poker its 80% skill and 20% luck? I dont think so. Even Johnny Chan gives it 50-50. I'm not disputing the obvious fact that there are people who earn a living at poker. My point is that what gives the pros their advantage is slowly slipping away. read the three harrington books and what separates you from a "pro"? You must be buying in to the idea of being a pro, much like someone who buys a stock after its gone up 200%.

[alexruimy 0]

Well, shleprock, why do you have to use 'put downs' to strengthen your argument? its weak.. Your going to say in tournament poker its 80% skill and 20% luck? I dont think so. And my point is that what gives the pros their advantage is slowly slipping away. read the three harrington books and what separates you from a "pro"? You must be buying in to the idea of being a pro, much like someone who buys a stock after its gone up 200%.

I think you missed the part where shleprock said "in the long run."

[medicalmj 0]

Always get it in written when your dealing with large amounts of cash. Money has a way of making even the most honest people dishonest.\If this is true then hopefully other people will learn and not make the same mistake and they will get it in writting before fronting someone the money.

[brvheart 1,768]

#1. Okay, i have no idea what you're talking about.#2. I am ahead in poker, just not enough to keep up playing a game.#3. And I'm saying NOW that with the fields so huge, it's 100% advantage to be luckier than skilled. There might have been skilled involved at some point, but not anymore and not often enough to matter. Does poker even make sense anymore? For the average tournament or cash game you might as well throw terms like "pot odds" out of the window because you will eventually run into a person that if he believes he'll hit that gushot, he'll call almost any bet and all you have to do is hope he doesn't hit it.Nowadays the "pros" have so much going for them that who cares if they don't win. Maybe to them it will matter, but they'll still get endorsments and games or have other friends who are riding the good side of variance to back them and they might even sue someone just to get their name back out there.The only reason you are getting mad about this is because i'm giving valid points and making you think about it.

LOL... if more people start calling me for all their chips on a gutshot, I would be SO happy...

1st- he is a multimillionaire. so any sort of stake would be pretty unusual. [This is just speculation on your part... where is your proof that he is a multimillionare PRE-WSOP?]3rd- if his ego is even a tenth as big as you guys assume it is, there is no wayin hell he offers a stake of his winnings. he would just give the guy a few thousand for helping him out.[steve Dannenmen made the same deal last year with his poker buddy and ended up giving him half of his winnings. FYI, I got the impression from seeing Dannenmen's house and cars that he was probably close to being a millionare BEFORE he came in 2nd, so why would he make this deal with his friend?]

[SwamiSwan 0]

I think you missed the part where shleprock said "in the long run."

Hi I'm just saying 'the long run' encompasses the assumption that all things remain the same, and player abilities will remain constant: they won't.'the long run will be the short run as amatures (sp) get better and better.

[alexruimy 0]

Hi I'm just saying 'the long run' encompasses the assumption that all things remain the same, and player abilities will remain constant: they won't

Hi. The amateurs may get better and better but 1) there will always be people who are new to the game 2) there will be players who have plateaued, skill wise 3) pros will get better along with the amateurs. Remember Hellmuth whining in the 2004 and 2005 WSOP's about the "minefield?" He didn't do very well, but it seems like he adjusted his abilities and had a hell of a WSOP this year. The best players can adjust to beat the competition.

[alf13 0]

I do agree with one thing...MTT poker is HEAVYILY luck driven.Skill will get you in a position to win it....LUCK will be the reason you did win.The MTT structure has to be so forgiving and the field has to be so small to really attribute a large number like 80% to skill.If you want to attribute a large number to skill...you better be talking about Cash games.

[SwamiSwan 0]

Hi. The amateurs may get better and better but 1) there will always be people who are new to the game 2) there will be players who have plateaued, skill wise 3) pros will get better along with the amateurs. Remember Hellmuth whining in the 2004 and 2005 WSOP's about the "minefield?" He didn't do very well, but it seems like he adjusted his abilities and had a hell of a WSOP this year. The best players can adjust to beat the competition.

Point well taken. However, don't you think there is a 'ceiling' to the ability to play this game, outside of having outstanding 'psychic powers'? I mean, some point where the actual optimum level of skill to extract the most money from each given poker situation will have been obtained, and this will be acquired by 'more' people?Perhaps if the level of 'new players' increases at a faster pace than amateurs attain 'optimum' playing ability, the term 'pro' will hold relevance in the future.

[fckthis 0]

I just take the results of ppl who consistently finish high in these "luckbox" fests, as proof, that its not ALL luck, and there is a method on how to do well in these things.

[alexruimy 0]

Point well taken. However, don't you think there is a 'ceiling' to the ability to play this game, outside of having outstanding 'psychic powers'? I mean, some point where the actual optimum level of skill to extract the most money from each given poker situation will have been obtained, and this will be acquired by 'more' people?

I don't think so. Remember "...minute to learn, lifetime to master?" Know how pros are always saying that they're learning more about the game every session? Shall I go on?

[Teffy 0]

I agree.As for Jamie Gold, regardless of what he is truly like, he still comes across as a ******. There are so many mixed messages coming from this guy and so many stories going around about him, mostly negative, that it would be very difficukt to discount them all. Did anyone talk **** like this about Raymer, Hachem or even Moneymaker? No. People call Moneymaker a huge donk, but he hasn't had anywhere near the negative press, in the past couple of years, that Gold has had in the past few days. To me, he seems like he's an obfuscating, self-serving, spoiled little ***** who lies thorugh his teeth every chance he gets. Oh, snap! I forgot! He's a Hollywood talent agent! That's what they generally do for a living, anyway. He may not be a pro poker player, but he's a pro bullshitter, no doubt.

Actually, there was a big pile of **** uttered regarding Hachem and his supposed lack of dealer tips after he won the event.

I haven't check out to see if this is for real...if it is it will be a sad day for poker...yet funny for some reason. But I don't have a good sense for (sw)...so I way off base.On a side note, tone it down, too many cheap shots for me to read after being up only 30 minutes...at least try to dilute it down.

The sarcasm in the post you quoted was as obvious as a brick to the side of the head. How you did/t get that, i will never understand.

[Kuge 0]

Actually, there was a big pile of **** uttered regarding Hachem and his supposed lack of dealer tips after he won the event.The sarcasm in the post you quoted was as obvious as a brick to the side of the head. How you did/t get that, i will never understand.

Neither will I

[Stylin_Fish 0]

Raymer also got some slack because of how many coin-flips he won in that tournament. The term "in the long run" is thrown around too much. "In the long run, skill wins out." I honestly don't believe that, I think variance just catches up and with the amount of media coverage and the amount of players, 1 tournament win can set your BR for years and years in advance. You could lose every single tournament you're in being card dead and getting 1 outered. Then all of a sudden, you win a big tournament. Was it because of your skill? unlikely because in such massive field you'd better be lucky enough to win some races or you have no shot. In these tournaments it's better to be lucky than good. I even heard Daniel Negreanu once say after catching a card, "Man I felt that one was coming." What kind of "pro" says that? We rag on Danny Nyguen and Doug lee and other "amateurs" about it. Don't get me wrong, Daniel is awesome and great for the game.Anyways, back to my point. Now maybe if your win came in a small tournament with distuingshed "pros" and there is a chance for some skill to actually show up then maybe I'd say you played better than got luckier. But if it's a small field with just "pros", it's probably an invite only or a 2 million dollar freeroll which is something completely different. All I'm saying is that luck plays a MUCH bigger factor(ESPECIALLY in tournament poker)than most people care to believe.

[doublemeup 0]

What an *******. If he doesn't pay up, I hope Johnny Chan gets the big game players to club him to death and say "thats poker."

[Loismustdie 0]

going out and a limb and say that this will not get him killed. there deffinatly seemed to be something weird going on with this guy the last couple of days. why would phil gordon go out of his way to say this guy didnt have a backing deal during the broadcast? he made a deal and is gonna weasel out of it(i guess anyone who doesnt get anything in writing from an agent should have known). very douchey but it is not expected coming from a world class douchebag. this guy has absolutely no marketabilty like previous champs and hopefully he just goes away but not before donking off a pile of his money.

Hes already got his own table at Bodog. Where there is buz, there is marketability.

I just take the results of ppl who consistently finish high in these "luckbox" fests, as proof, that its not ALL luck, and there is a method on how to do well in these things.

Bingo.

[HappyG 0]

I just take the results of ppl who consistently finish high in these "luckbox" fests, as proof, that its not ALL luck, and there is a method on how to do well in these things.

I just don't count him in this sample.

[GrinderMJ 0]

The stupidity in this thread is overwhelming. To the people whining and saying poker is all luck, why are you here? If you think poker is an unbeatable game that favors the lucky and not the good, why do you spend time by reading about it?

[matt21sz 0]

Hi I'm just saying 'the long run' encompasses the assumption that all things remain the same, and player abilities will remain constant: they won't.'the long run will be the short run as amatures (sp) get better and better.

Who gives the mentally handicapped computers??

[HappyG 0]

Who gives the mentally handicapped computers??

[Mercury69 3]

Actually, there was a big pile of **** uttered regarding Hachem and his supposed lack of dealer tips after he won the event.

Well, that just makes him a cheapskate, not a bad poker player. A lot of people are saying Jamie Gold sux at poker, along with the many claims he's a complete idiot. On the other hand, he must have done something right to win the ME.Anyway, I don't like the way Gold or Hachem looks or talks, so they can both go to hell lol. Moneymaker looks like a retard from the movie Deliverance. Raymer could stand to lose a bunch of wieght, but at least he seems like a fairly balance individual.

[navybuttons 16]

Raymer also got some slack because of how many coin-flips he won in that tournament. The term "in the long run" is thrown around too much. "In the long run, skill wins out." I honestly don't believe that, I think variance just catches up and with the amount of media coverage and the amount of players, 1 tournament win can set your BR for years and years in advance. You could lose every single tournament you're in being card dead and getting 1 outered. Then all of a sudden, you win a big tournament. Was it because of your skill? unlikely because in such massive field you'd better be lucky enough to win some races or you have no shot. In these tournaments it's better to be lucky than good. I even heard Daniel Negreanu once say after catching a card, "Man I felt that one was coming." What kind of "pro" says that? We rag on Danny Nyguen and Doug lee and other "amateurs" about it. Don't get me wrong, Daniel is awesome and great for the game. Anyways, back to my point . Now maybe if your win came in a small tournament with distuingshed "pros" and there is a chance for some skill to actually show up then maybe I'd say you played better than got luckier. But if it's a small field with just "pros", it's probably an invite only or a 2 million dollar freeroll which is something completely different. All I'm saying is that luck plays a MUCH bigger factor(ESPECIALLY in tournament poker)than most people care to believe.

sometime before christmas please.but seriously, we get it, great players do not win every hand.

[PairTheBoard 0]

I want to play Jamie Gold in the Movie.

[Stylin_Fish 0]

sometime before christmas please.but seriously, we get it, great players do not win every hand.

That is not it at all lol.