The life and legacy of Chris Moneymaker, 15 years after his WSOP Main Event win changed poker forever.

http://www.espn.com/poker/story/_/id...ed-world-poker

Poker HOF is a sham without Moneymaker imo.

Great article about a genuine guy. Chris was great for the game and 15 years later he still is great for the game. Very approachable guy who plays poker for the love of the game.

HOF would be a great touch and his impact on the game makes me think he deserves it.

His win made a lot of money for a lot of players online. You could not have picked a better person to win at that time then a guy with his personality and the name of "Moneymaker."

Unfortunately, the next winner will probably be named Joe Rakemore.

Awesome, thanks for sharing.

Read that the other day, thought it was really good. Really like how Chris seems to have handled all of it, seems to genuinely enjoy the game and his life, hats off to him.

Is he not in it? He was definitely rookie of the year once and he has done a good job since then so get him in!

I was once playing poker with him at the

Thank you Sammy for folding top pair, there might not have been the boom if you hadn't.

Watch the 2002 WSOP and then watch the 2003 WSOP. The broadcast quality took a great leap forward. I definitely think Moneymaker contributed to the boom, but I think there were other factors. People would've found internet poker eventually and WPT/WSOP produced shows that made the players seem cool. 2003 is really where ESPN went hard on turning the players into characters and I think that helped a lot. Suddenly it wasn't just a boring card game. It was fun and exciting for casuals.

It is the same arguement about whether Don Larsen should be in the Baseball HOF. Does one single amazing event justify entry into a HOF with what is otherwise a rather ordinary career. Nobody would be arguing for him going in without winning the main event in that year.

I agree. No one claims that he is at the top rank in terms of skill, but any history of poker will mention him, and for that alone he should be there.

I am a fan myself. Poker could do with more modest gentlemen. He is always classy and has time for everyone.

Moneymaker, ESPN, and Orenstein, all in equal parts. All responsible for the poker boom.

Orenstein, had the idea to make poker on TV watchable for the common folk.

ESPN, produced a polished product for the casual observer and broadcasted it over a nationally renowned network with millions of viewers daily. Allowing poker to catch on mainstream.

Moneymaker, his story inspired people to go out and play, because they could one day be playing heads-up for a WSOP bracelet and $2.5 million. This dream was infectious to millions and helped generate large player pools and potential customers that advertisers could cater to.

The 2003 Poker Boom needed all three of them to ignite into the unstoppable force it was for 7-8 years.

With that said, there will never again be a poker boom like 2003. I believe this statement to be true, because there are way too many wizards out there now. If the wizards were rampant back in 2003, Moneymaker would've never won. Because of this, the casual observer, or new blood, will quickly realize the dream just isn't attainable, without devoting hours upon hours, to studying the game.

"Fame"

the condition of being known or talked about by many people, especially on account of notable achievements.


I personally feel that his name alone, based on recognition to even the most casual of players, is worthy of entry to the Hall of Fame. As it stands, there are many names in the Hall that I myself have never heard of. Surely Chris deserves a spot above some of these guys.

He really set the bar for WSOP ME Champ ambassador. Was the first face of the every man and made poker relatable.

I am happy for him and his genuine attitude towards it all. Not every pro is one that I would look forward to meeting someday, but this guy is one I would love to meet because it is very likely that he would be happy (or at least willing) to meet a fan as well.

........this cliffhanger though

Why not Moneymaker?

We are only talking Poker HOF, this is rungs below even the WWE HOF on the legit ladder....
and they let plenty of one hit celebs in.

Are poker players famous or infamous?

depends on the player. Phil Ivey, famous. Doug Lee, infamous.

While I agree that it's much harder, it's still possible. Look at a guy like Darvin Moon. Nearly rode a massive heater all the way to the top. I'm sure he's a better player than he let on, but it's not like he was some online beast. Even if 8/9 people at the FT are solid, there's still room for that one casual to run like a god for a week. Wasn't it just last year that we had that goofy older dude at the FT playing strangely and charming the crowd? There will always be stories like that.

From my seat, you guys are addressing two different things. Pokerbeast says there may never be another boom like there was in 2003, and it's hard to argue with that. That was a perfect storm of many factors and conditions.

You seem to be talking about another Moneymaker Everyman type winning the Main, which still can happen and still DOES happen, or Qui Nguyen was just a figment of our imaginations.

Unfortunately, it takes more than the latter to create the former. But the latter probably would be necessary to have a true boom. If the U.S. ever gets its head out of its ass and legalized online poker nationwide, let's hope that some amateur ships the ME in the same year.

I keep hearing that Orenstein invented the hole card cam, but Late Night Poker in the UK was using them back in 1999.

I deposited money on PokerStars because I saw Moneymaker and figured if he could do it, then it must not be rigged and I would give it a try too.

Orenstein patented a specific type of table that shows like Late Night Poker used. https://patents.justia.com/patent/5451054

This patent was filed on May 3, 1994, and approved in September of 1995.

Different technology from the lipstick camera we saw later in the TV poker boom, but I don't know who patented the latter.