If Sam Farha had defeated Chris Moneymaker in the WSOP Main Event in 2003 do you think there would have been a poker boom like we saw in the mid 2000s?
Farha carries a Phil Ivey aura for a little while as the boom explodes as normal.
Farha was a top pro so I don't think we would have got a poker boom anywhere near as much as we saw. Moneymaker being an average Joe who won via a $39 PokerStars satellite was HUGE! It showed the world that anyone could be a world champion and multi millionaire. So everyone went crazy and started playing online when they saw Moneymaker win.
My game was a mix of super system and farha while drinking cheap vodka. Back in the day it was very profitable. Nowadays? Well i try not to play anymore lol
There appears to be a limit on the number of threads you can create. I think being new makes people dislike you more.
Where is the limit listed? If there is a limit then that's fine and I won't go beyond it. And I could care less if some of these clowns who have been here forever like me or not.
There might have been less divorces and more career successes as fewer fan boys would have bought into the dream and thus more would have spent more time on their family life, career, schooling, etc..
Sammy was such a poor sport about the loss, even 10 years later when they played that sit n go as part of the 10 year anniversary he was still quite rude to Chris. Very, very glad he didn't win, his ego was gigantic enough already.
I would think there would've been a slower boom, but by 2006 it would have been at the same level. And as far as I'm concerned, Farha should get almost the same amount of credit for the boom as Moneymaker. He was the perfect foil to Moneymaker, with the status of professional gambler, the slick hair, the unlit cigarette and how he was dressed. If Moneymaker was heads up against some other schlub like Moneymaker (no disrespect) then it wouldn't have been as big a story.
I would think there would've been a slower boom, but by 2006 it would have been at the same level. And as far as I'm concerned, Farha should get almost the same amount of credit for the boom as Moneymaker. He was the perfect foil to Moneymaker, with the status of professional gambler, the slick hair, the unlit cigarette and how he was dressed. If Moneymaker was heads up against some other schlub like Moneymaker (no disrespect) then it wouldn't have been as big a story.
It was perfection, couldn’t have scripted it better
The Poker Boom was driven by online poker, when the DOJ shut it down it really sucked. Killed the poker economy, The money up top was stupid, and the game was amazing to play. Now in most places players play with themselves. They don't understand that they could have another boom, generate 10x's the poker revenue if they looked for growth, worldwide. They in all governments killed Online Poker.
Sammy was such a poor sport about the loss, even 10 years later when they played that sit n go as part of the 10 year anniversary he was still quite rude to Chris. Very, very glad he didn't win, his ego was gigantic enough already.
In fairness he's a total jackass nasty person in general so it might have nothing to do with losing.
Farha and Chris couldn't be more opposite as people.
There might have been less divorces and more career successes as fewer fan boys would have bought into the dream and thus more would have spent more time on their family life, career, schooling, etc..
I was playing near his table during wsop and have played with him before. Super nice funny guy.
Someone probably 35 or so came up to him and said "Chris you're the reason I got Into NL"
Chris said"gee I'm really sorry about that" with a chuckle.
There is definitely an element of truth to it though for a lot of people.
