It's a skill game, Jo.

Now, just for a pro to win the Main Event! There has to be a balance between "anyone can win at poker" and "I want to sweat my favourite pro!" In the last few years, it's probably been too weighted to the latter. Fish want to know that they can win a bracelet, but they also want to root for Ivey when there's no-one else they recognise.

This is exactly what is happening, couldn't have said it better. Next year look for chinese poker, badugi, & texas' stud....

what is texas stud?

[x] Not the opposite of the opposite of the opposite of the reverse of unhilarious

Seriously though I'm starting to suspect foul play. I don't know how it could be done though, it'd require pretty vast conspiracy.

Phil Ivey seems way too confident in all those huge bets he's placing on himself getting a bracelet. The bet is clearly -EV if he isn't cheating somehow, so why was he so confident and betting so much?

It's probably a good thing if they cheat and get away with it though. Consistent bracelet-winning TV pros sustains the image of poker being a skill game and generates a ton of interest in the game and brings in a lot of new blood. I would love to see those idiots winning more bracelets.

There are 300 "pros" in every event. Of course a pro that you have heard of is going to win.

I think a problem is:

many online pros dont have big names yet.

like there is porlly a ton of 5/10 (cash game) pros playing in events.

these guys make like 5-6 figures possibly, but for whatever reason they are just not big names.

And I mean big names have won lesst han the majority of the events. 1/3 maybe? Alot of it comes from the mixed games. I'd say while the online pros might be lagging behind, it is not by much.

Also, I feel big names play smaller fields b/c:
the feel they have bigger edge in skill
also it is more likley to win a bracelet

online guys pretty much play NLHE IMO and so those feilds are always bigger and thus more difficult to win (IMO)

The structure this year was incredible. After 9 levels the blinds were only at 500/1000 with 100 ante each in the 1500 NL. Made playing flops alot cheapier. Actually felt like playing poker rather than a shove fest pre flop.

what planet are people on where they think tv pros are outperforming online players this wsop?

'nuff said

sounds like you've got the formula. when's your flight to vegas?

i'd actually be curious to hear from someone really smart regarding full tilt's bracelet domination, but structure seems reasonable

also congrats to the hinkle family, so sick

Better structure, imo. Apart from event 25. Spew

The planet where TV pros are way more known by name than online players.

Most people who are serious enough about poker to pony up a WSOP entry fee also play online sometimes.

i dont like this post

easy. As more of tournaments are played, you know more players, so it seems like they are doing better. In reality, you just know more players, and they all seem to be pros. The 27 NL tournament was a perfect example. There were 80ish players in a game noone plays...Is it a surprise that most people(i.e. those who play the game to make money) don't concentrate on how to play that game never runs and isnt played anyplace? reaching the final table of an 80 player tournament is nothing, especially if you play non******edly, which cannot be said for half the field...crunch some numbers about the likelihood of reaching the final table if you have a 100% RoR in an 80 player field...

How are you supposed to have a 100% RoR in an 80 person field if it's crammed with pros?

Nenad Medic
David Singer
Erick Lindgren
Mike Matusow
Daniel Negreanu
Max Pescatori
Kenny Tran
Barry Greenstein

8/22 have been TV pros (not counting womens event)

I'd have to assume online pros outnumber live pros at least 2:1 in NLHE events

I mean like $1500 NLHE events there is gunna be a ton of online pros
TV pros have a huge advantage in high stakes mixed games MTTs b/c like 80% of the player pool is TV pros.

overall: no idea how online pros are doing, but it is clear that they do no play mixed games at all.

You should probably research things before making stupid posts imo

joke?

they are out named like 4:1 in all the non NLHE event cashes.
im not toking about $1500 omaha

im talking about like 10k omaha, 10k limit holdem, 10k stud, etc....

I mean is this called online players owning

http://www.pokernews.com/live-report...p-counts/day1/

therse @ least a couple for online guys left in this one:

http://www.pokernews.com/live-report...p-counts/day2/

oh sorry i forgot durrrr bubbled the FT in the $5k TD event. So, they did pown that tourney actually.

The stacked final tables just aren't stopping:


Official Final Table Seating Assignments and Chip Counts
$5,000 rebuy PLO

Seat 1: John Juanda 694,000
Seat 2: Phil Hellmuth 119,000
Seat 3: David Benyamine 1,041,000
Seat 4: Kirill Gerasimov 558,000
Seat 5: Phil Galfond 1,393,000
Seat 6: Daniel Negreanu 460,000
Seat 7: Brian Rast 1,176,000 ("tsarrast")
Seat 8: Adam Hourani 300,000
Seat 9: Johnny Chan 624,000


Aside from Gerasimov and Hourani, everyone else is a major poker celebrity, pretty much guaranteeing another big pro will be getting a bracelet. (I mean big pro, not random red guy of the week.)

I think improved structures have to be playing some role in all this. Especially considering that the top three chip leaders play in the big 200/400 FTP game.

I'll be a little embarassed if Hellmuth wins, though.


BTW, congrats to Barry G for the Razz win. That was actually a pretty big field-- Razz has picked up a cult following among the poker proletariat... emphasis on "cult".

Hmz, Gerasimov is a big name I think. I've seen him on some shows to.

I think Trahehos match to Kenny Tran has finally ended the live vs online skills debate.