too solid

Shock horror .....tournament player makes mistakes yet wins tournaments......how is this so?

guess he brought a grenade to a gun fight

I will give him credit for being level headed in this first video posted here

Does that include Hellmuth's win?

Well the thing is, the reason bad players often confuse good ones with lines or plays that 'don't make sense' is because their lines are so bad it forces the good player to re-evaluate their perception of the other guy's play, and you often don't get the chance to see the period of adaptation that comes afterward.

There are often spots vs bad players where you have fold equity even though you'd never have it vs good players, but you don't find out until you've gone through such a spot, and you don't get the chance to use that info until it comes around again. You might be able to 3bet a guy super light because he folds to almost all 3bets, but until you get a hand good enough to 3bet someone for whom you didn't have that information (probably more than once in order that you see him fold more than once), you don't find out that he's folding too much so you can't adapt.

Essentially what I'm saying is that tournament poker is all about inferences based on tiny sample sizes, which is where variance is heightened. So far, Frankenberger has played a small sample of hands in spots where a high % of his tournament equity is on the line, and over those particular hands he has run extremely good, and he's happened to make 'unconventional' plays in spots where it hasn't affected his equity much. However, what you don't see in live poker is how much value he might lose in the long term by playing big hands 'unconventionally', or how exploitable he might become. People are super results-oriented and to say X, Y or Z play is good or bad just because it worked or didn't work is false logic - there's no such thing as 'can't argue with results' in poker. You can argue with them, and you can also argue that some random midstakes grinder is the best player in the world. LOL variance.

I dont know what its worst: Folding Queens getting 5.5 to 1 or 6betting AK. I hate poeple who overplay AK

I HATE THEM

the king high river check bluff was my favorite play from him last night imo. totally outplayed ivey obv.

How is this relevant?

except Andys the one giving out the beatings, floggings and crucifixions

The reaction to Andy reminds me of the early days of the poker boom when all the pros were getting run over by the aggressive internet kids and the pros constantly bashed their play instead of looking in the mirror and realizing they weren't adapting correctly to the new style of play and were being outplayed as a result. It took some time but they soon adapted and eventually began to respect the internet players.

I can't help but wonder if there is a little bit of this going on with Andy, I just can't see how you can luck box your way through an entire tournament on a consistent basis so I suspect he's doing something right to continually get to these final tables. We unfortunately don't get to see all the hands he plays, only the few that make the news.

I still am left wondering the answer to the question of how he does it though.

Was starting to wonder the same thing. Wondering even more if having amazing instincts can make up for poor play.

Proven hero GG

It was a joke. You know, cause Poker and equity...Actually..just forget about it..

to anyone defending andy did u watch the final table? im not being sarcastic at all when i say that he ran like jesus...he lost 1 meaningful all in the entire final table and it was when it was 10 handed and he lost a10 vs the other clown at the table ali's j8 all in on 108x flop turn 9 river 7...even after that bad beat he still had above average stack...after that he ran like god...he coolered about 3 dudes qq>kqcc button vs bb, AA>ak 3 handed...twice he won a massive race with ak>66 and 66>ak(the board ran out 10J6...Q...Q when he had 66 vs shaun deebs ak)...i do think he played OK HU vs ivey though...

all the people saying he owned ivey in the k6 hand, i dont think so...ivey clearly had a flush draw and i think he thought that andy was so spazzy and weird that if he bet the river andy would hero call with any pair...the old saying "u cant bluff a bad player" i honestly thought phil thought he was getting called if andy had any piece...the more i think about it the more i think andy played that hand like an idiot...he was clearly check folding the river, so if hes gonna check raise the turn and rep something huge then i think he has to bet the river...he just got lucky that ivey had what he had and didnt want to pull the trigger on the river...everything at the final table just worked out for andy, which seems to happen quite often with him...

IMPLODED

this

Ivey let him win, let the fish enjoy some success so he can get him in the cash games later - it's the only explanation.

Fell asleep after his sick hand vs Deeb, updates on his other luckboxaments?

Proof right here that there's not necessarily an "optimal line" the way online players think. It's always been a small pet peeve of mine when online players call a certain play an "optimal line"

Go Andy! Hero to live players!

i laughed... hard

/NormanChadftw

He's definitely keeping the illusion alive.

Confirmed $10 freezeout player

The difference is that some of the old school pros were adapting by actually acknowledging the math behind poker. Something that the internet kids were trying to explain to them by using simple logic.
Therefore you cant compare it with Frankenbergers case, unless he can actually come up with a logical explanation for his plays.

confirmed Andy Frankenberger GOAT?

inb4 Frankendonker's monster wins the main event