lol @ you thinking I'm some old bitter poker player.

You should scroll up and read Matt Glantz's post a few times until it sinks on. Actually, don't do that, just keep playing the role of cliche 2p2 poker guy, thanks.

Just wow. Did he misplay those hands? Yes. But who here hasn't made epic mistakes when they were new to the game. If he's succesfull: good for him. Why all the hate, I thought good players don't tap the glass.

Andy, I sincerely hope you win another bracelet this season just to piss off all the haters.

lol hilarious

ROFL

I love Andy because he made Feldman cry.

I coudn't care less how good or bad he is, who should care about this anyway?

Just let him win his WPT's WSOP etc.. dont be frustrated

I know the guy has made some bad plays and got lucky some, we all do, but he has had an amazing couple of years and consistently making deep runs. He must be doing something right.

This x 10000

I am amazed at the hate/jealousy towards Frankenberger itt. sure he's butchered a few hands along the way (unlike everyone itt of course) but he's clearly doing a lot right, hence the continual strong results. It's just that he plays a very unorthodox style, and appears to play on feel a lot. Not suprising that internet crowd struggle to get this.

His utter crushing of Feldman heads up (loved it when he folded pre flop like one time, and Feldman happened to have AA) is one of the most soul-owning displays I have seen in televised HU play.

As for the qq fold, i think people are being really harsh here - yes it was not his finest play, but he's still pretty new to the game, right? Flanked either side by world class players, utg Mizzi opens, Frankenberger 3 bets from utg +1, timenshenko stays in play. frankenberger presumably manages to convince himself that he's up against AA/KK after such strong early action hasn't chased everyone else out of the hand. I know that he still has to call given the pot odds alone, but as said, he appears to play primarily on feel - and it works for him. (Disclamier - not excusing the play, just trying to understand his thought process.)

I'm a fan. just imagine what a beast he could become once he gets his fundamentals right - that's the easy part. the part the he already seems to be strong at, well..... hard to teach that shi-iit

I like Andy, I think he's a good guy and I hope his rush can continue, but I also think he overrates himself

I can't help but wonder if he really is serious: sure he has won an event, but that was his only cash in 2011 and he only had a small cash in 2010.

You call K10 beating KQ all in pre utter domination? I'm glad he beat Feldman too but let's get real here.

Frankenberger is the Tearjerker


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6fbGSrdBOM

No. i call that ONE hand

I love the way people are calling his play creative and unconventional as if he's a level 6 thinker or something.

The guy's just clicking buttons FFS

Have you watched the entire HU? He absolutely crushed Feldman, put him on complete tilt and made him cry. He destroyed him.

Yeah, I've watched it and I agree with you. I loved seeing that jizzrag getting torn apart, but in the K10 vs KQ hand, Feldman would have had a big lead if he had won. I wouldn't call that destroying him. It was getting lucky in a huge and vital pot.

Glad to see Matt G give his thoughts on this. Well respected.

Fully believe a winning online player can be a winning live player especially with some adjustments with live experience etc (and not necessarily the other way around).

However, the two games are different. The player pool is different. Being able to see players adds another complicated dimension. What may be seen as a standard play online may not be best live play given the player type and dynamics.

I heard the Juanda was heavily criticized at WPT FT recently for several non standard plays. Really? The guy is world class. Yeah he might butcher one hand here and there. Who doesnt? But his feel is incredible. Watched his headsup bracelet win vs Hellmuth in 2-7 last year at WSOP. He was amazing.

I've made some ******ed looking laydowns, calls, and wierd lines that were optimal at the time given players and dynamics.

I played a sick 5-10 NL hand vs Dave Tuchman (LATB) couple years ago.

Dave checked the turn back on a wet, flush-straight draw board with a set-something that is defintely non-standard. I had flopped top set. I read him for major strength on flop and just "knew" he would never check turn so was going for turn CR.

River was a blank. I bet. Thought my flop read was wrong so looking to induce or get thin value. Dave made a long crying call with set and lost the absolute minimum. I felt like I got owned for not winning more as we both were deep. I was reading him for strength on flop but he mentioned later he read me for major strength as well. Hence his turn check.

The beauty of poker is its complexity- there are more than one way to successfully play a hand and certainly more than one winning style of play.

The other appealing aspect of poker is the continuous learning process. Having a rigidity in thinking that this is "standard" limits growth.

Matt Glantz echoes his thoughts on this in Cardplayer Scoop interview as well.

Good luck on continued success Andy...

Did you and Dave make da love for hours after?

Glantz can post whatever but that doesn't mean he's right. Unconventional play is one thing, but ******ed is another. But hey, AF has luckboxed a handful of tournaments, so he must be doing something right. Nobody ever does that without some serious talent.

Maybe you have to be good enough to know when you play poorly.

Knocked Andy out of a $525 stt last night at the rio. I can't recall any of his televised play so I can't comment on that but I didn't see anything bad in his play last night.

I have only played with Frankenberger once (lol sample size) but he seemed like a very nice guy, who despite having had a ton of recent success (this was last year during WSOP), was as focused and grinding as hard as anyone at the table.

He totally destroyed Feldman. The big bluff with A9o was the turning point in the match obviously. The hand worked out fine in the end for Frankenburger; nevertheless I think shoving pre would've been a lot better than just calling. If a non-paired board would've run out, shipping it after the second barrel with ace high is a lot tougher.

The QQ hand pretty much shows he's oblivious to the concept of pot odds. Man, he must have worked hard on his game!

He clicks buttons based on his feels. His feels are probably naturally better than most people and he likes clicking raise, so when he runs good he can get a lot of chips and win.

Pic of me in HS:



NOT ANDY FRANKENBERGER! But we do look a lot alike.

If he's had more success in 2 years than I have in 30 plus .... he must be a calling station, donkey, luckbox on a heater.

I mean .... he must be doing SOMETHING right. Right? Besides being handsome, like me.

ETA: Quick answers to anticipated questions: 1986, The Subhumans, and yeah ... I prolly was one of the first ppl ever with a faux-hawk.

I remember a conversation after a tournament I won once .... was either Stars or FTP. After the game, this guy messaged me, "You aren't as good as you think you are." and at one point I said, "When I am getting cards, I am unstoppable." and he said, "Everyone is unstoppable when they are getting cards."

I would disagree. Some people can't play good cards well. Because of their table image, they wont get paid off.

Yeah, you're like 2 peas in a pod....WTF