Which was why I checked up on him in the FIDE database (http://ratings.fide.com/seek.phtml?i...arwer&offset=0). If he had even a FIDE performance, he'd be there. He isn't.

He was assigned a 2300 by the organizers for pairing purposes, and presumably exceeded that in his tourney performance, but he has no rating anywhere, it appears.

Bad all-in call for Sarwer...He was getting slightly more than 2 to 1, but Ace-Deuce is not a hand to make that call with, unless you put your opponent on a very wide 4-bet range....

Double or Nothing for Neuville
Pierre Neuville raised to 125,000 from the small blind, and Jeff Sarwer came at him with a three-bet. From the big, he made it 300,000, but Neuville wasn't going anywhere. After taking a pause for effect, he announced an all in for 805,000 total, sending Sarwer deep into the tank. It would be another few minutes before Sarwer acted, and the two men exchanged a few good-natured words. Neuville finally stood from his chair, and Sarwer continued to banter with him. He finally called to put Neuville squarely at risk.

Neuville was first to show, and he tabled . "Oh ****!" said Sarwer, still smiling. He tabled , needing to come from behind if he was going to tally the knockout.

The board ran out safe for Neuville though, coming 5-9-Q-A-5. Neuville's kicker plays, and he notches the double up back into contention. He's now up to about 1.65 million, still the short stack but out of the danger zone for now.

So he finished 3rd, not bad for 2 EPTs, one 10th and one 3rd.

lol +1

Regardless of his results now and in the future, this is certainly an incredible story. I, for one, am fascinated and want to know more.

agreed that video on his site was a good watch for sure

he IMO will do well online with his clear ability to think/act fast while playing many games....he seemed to be a multitabler b4 it even existed....what a tough life he seems to have lived, esp during his youth, much props to still being sane.

Does he play online now?

can someone please tell me wtf FIDE is? obv some rating system for chess but what it stands for and how you gain points... im curious

the problem is that by trying to exploit others you make it possible for them to exploit you... therefore you would hardly ever have huge win rates by playing near-optimal... to crush people at poker you need to read their souls (like ivey does ) and being a genius hardly helps there...

Federation Internationale des Echecs

http://www.fide.com/fide

http://ratings.fide.com/calculators.phtml

"Id rather make the right plays and lose the game than make the wrong plays and win the game"

/thread

Sounds like a true champion to me. GL to him.

I hope Jeff will be in Prague. I feel like I need to talk to him about poker & chess after this thread.

i want to see him in action, he sounds like he could be sick

FIDE's the world chess federation. They rate international over-the-board (real life, not on-line) chess events. If you have a FIDE rating, you're reasonably good, or so the thinking used to go.

Talked to him a bunch, a few things to point out
-after this event hes played 6 EPTs with 3 cashes
- as everyone else has said hes a super cool, reasonable guy
- its tough to get an idea of exactly how good he is since he definitely has a very different approach and doesn't really disect hands in the nit-picky way that twoplustwoers do, and his approach is definitely much more of a broad gameplan than a specific one, I really want to see what happens after he travels the circuit for longer, or better yet strarted putting in legit volume online since I honestly have no idea... I do know as I spent more and more time talking to him I became more and more confident hes a sicko
- his approach is kind of the complete opposite, 2+2 thrives off of staying out of tough spots at all costs, he intentionally tries to get in as many tough spots as possible
-he said his playing strength is probably about 2500 FIDE, and despite being 31 he thinks he could become a top 100 player if he really dedicated himself to it- but if he hadn't quit at a young age and had been studying properly, he thinks he could have one day been a top 10 player
- he hates online chess and doesn't really like the idea of playing much online poker either
- Despite talking to him a decent amount about poker, his approach is just so far different from mine and every other 2+2ers that I don't really know how much merit I give to the "it will take him 1 month to get good" or "1 year until hes the best claims" since I honestly just don't know what that much about his game, and how its changed in recent months, what he plans on changing in the future etc, I feel like sweating his hole cards while having him like annotate his thought process would be extremely interesting since he didn't do that much specific poker talk, and mostly just talked about broader ideas
- The thing I am most interested in seeing is whether he maintains being as lag as he is. It seems like the majority of players start out lag and then become nittier as time goes on, I'm curious whether he'll tighten up or become even more hyper-lag(to give an idea how lag he is, he mentioned that often after really steamrolling a table he'll really tighten up to try and get paid and only play 20-30% of hands... which I'm pretty sure is about what most lags play during their laggy phases in live tournaments)

how many languages can he speak ?

LOOOL that is classic

I hope so as well, really need to interview this guy.

5 fluently

the way you get sick good at poker is by study not by being a chess genius. If he's getting to menlo's level in a year its because someone at menlo's level is coaching him the whole way.

And im suspicious of this "he looks at the whole game in a broad strategic manner". That sounds like the sort of thing an amateur poker player does. I know I did for a long time. Too long.

And at least in live poker, it takes a lot of practice to get to the point where you brain automatically remembers every hand and how every player has played thus far. The perceptiveness is not built in us and has to be learned. This of course doesnt matter in online poker as much since we have HUDs to help us with that.

because phil ivey only got to where he is because someone as good as phil ivey coached him every step of the way?

I disagree with the fact that great chess players always make great poker players.

Asides from being able to sit in a chair for a long time thinking for days, what else do the two games have in common? Also fwiw, i thnk Poker is a lot harder than chess.

phil ivey spent 10 years playing before he got world-class. The amount of hours he put in live is incredible.