OT- WSOP Main Event Live - what do you think?
Is anyone else watching the "Live" coverage of the Main Event? ("Live" because it's delayed a half hour on tv and like 5 minutes online) What do you think of the new format?
I'm still not sure. Live is better, and there's no avoiding talk of it so you don't get spoilers, but it does make it more "real"...which just isn't the interesting hands, and doesn't show as well what's going on around the room. You never see the default hand win where everyone else folded in the condensed version.
You can still watch the the delayed weekly version coming up (because the back up announcers are even MORE painful), and more coverage of something you like is good....but I don't see myself staying up till 4:30 am EST Wednesday morning to see it finish off (to the Final Table).
So anyone have any thoughts? Or am I the only one tuning into any of this the week NCAA '12 came out? (Though I have that too).
I love this; I've always wanted to be able to watch the WSOP without knowledge of who won/who busted out early. It lets you truly appreciate the play of players, in my opinion.
That being said, I'm sure 90% of people couldn't care less whether it's live or not.
They'll do this for the Final Table. THAT I would like to see live.
I think they really lucked out with the table draw. Without Negreanu, JRB, and Cunningham it might not be watchable
I have played in WSOP events for the last five years and spent one year actually travelling the WSOP circuit and while table draws are always supposed to be random I have both seen and heard of enough questionable things go on to call arguably the three biggest names left in the tournament at the same table suspect at the very least.
I still don't like poker coverage. What I would like to see is every player's hand during the play of every hand.
In that way, I could compare my own play to that of the champion.
When all you see are the dramatic hands, it's fun, but you don't learn very much.
Buy I don't think players want to teach you how to beat them for free.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is part of it, but I think mostly they are only interested in making interesting TV.
Perhaps they'll have alternative coverage sometime that is more complete.
The big players really shouldn't complain if they do, TV coverage has made them a lot of money.
have made a lot of them more money.
At first I was a little disappointed about not seeing the hole cards during the hand, but I'm finding the analysis to be a lot more pure & useful during the hand. I often question the pro's analysis of a hand and what players should do next when they see the hole cards because it just seems impossible that extra information it's not creating some sort of bias. In this case the analyst and myself are really going through the hand reading process, etc. simultaneously and I gain the benefit of being able to truly compare my thought process to various pro's and taking the things that I think will be profitable in my game.
Not to say that games where you see all the cards as things play out aren't very useful as well...I just find that this format allows me to exercise my poker muscles a little more as I watch while also taking in some useful information, strategies, etc.
It's kinda like playing against the pros, thinking what you'd do...with no risk, of course. But they couldn't show the hole cards anyway...too open to some sort of cheating.
But the announcing is interesting. Knowing they are calling the game live rather than maybe doing it watching in a booth and recording statements to fit the hand.
I find the announcing especially interesting because I've played far more online hands than live hands (and now I'm forced to play live, move to Canada or quit playing with Full Tilt, etc shutting down) and the announcers are trying to make a lot of reads in real time based on indicators that you can only get in the live format.
For example, Hellmuth just (accurately) put a player on a very specific hand range based on the amount of time he took to call (you could see this somewhat online but still)...if they could see the hole cards that little bit on nuance could easily be lost and I wouldn't have gotten the benefit of Hellmuth's experience. Hopefully they get Negreanu in the booth at some point, I'm still blown away by the accuracy of the reads he makes.
is how often he'll have an absolutely pristine read, and then ignore it and all anyway.
"I think you have a set.....I call."
That is so true. All these great instincts...but not the ability to tell when to listen to them. "Spider-sense....tingling...oh, well, I just swing into Doc Ock anyway...."
You may not believe this but right now my roommate is in 22nd with 1650000 chips and about 225 left. Scott schwalich, from west carrolton, ohio, root him on. He is definitely not a buck nut.
It's been TWO YEARS since we've had a Michigan fan win it.
Also, if he cant make the final table what rank does he want to reach before he busts out and what would he make for that? Just curious...
Update* the roommate is 49th out of 177 12 spots from making 54 stacks. He better pick up my half of the rent. Took a big hit (lost 300k chips) but is still doing well and I am living vicariously through him from the couch.
Looks like he may be buying the beer for the next few parties!
was quite possibly the worst played hand in the history of poker.
Right now he's the most interesting and insightful pro color guy I've heard. Most have just been "well, I wouldn't do THAT, because I know more than anyone else who's ever played". Phil's been giving feels and strategic moves.
is that Hellmuth is a really poor fundamental poker player. From what I've been told by people who have played with him at tournaments, he's awesome at creating an image that makes fish give him their money, but in terms of just pure poker strategy and fundamentals, he's not strong (basically every single thing he did in his bustout hand was a pretty obvious error, for example).
I would've thought that all the talk about the game passing Hellmuth by and not understanding the math, etc would stop with his 3 second place finishes in this year's WSOP. It's nearly impossible to navigate these phenomenal fields on pure image & feel alone.
having bad fundamentals when he stops raise/folding jacks with 15 bbs or going broke with 33 in a 3 bet pot when starts the hand with 20 bbs.
He's clearly not completely talentless, but, man, he sure seems to make more really obvious mistakes than any other well known, respected tourney pro.
Than anyone else, because he's going to finish 1/2 for the year in the standings. Which means everyone else made more mistakes. I mean, he's going to go down as one of the most accomplished players of all time. Maybe ego and instinct leads him to some bad moves...but who doesn't? It's not played by computers. And yet he still does far better than neatly everyone else. You don't have to like him; but to make it sound like 20 years of lucky is silly.
disagree with this. You can totally run hot for a month and finish 1st or 2nd in the player of the year race while making tons of basic errors.
Again, I'm not arguing that Hellmuth is a bad tournament poker player. He's clearly doing something right. But poker fundamentals is not that thing. Raise/folding pocket jacks when you have 15 big blinds is just a fundamental, level one error that no good poker player should ever make, ever. That's my issue with it; not that it's a mistake, but it's a mistake that no one who plays tournaments for a living should ever, ever make.
You'd have a point. But he's finished 2nd before, won tons of bracelets, and won the Main Event. If it's just a matter of being perfunctory competent to pretty good, why do the cards keep running hot for him, and why isn't everybody doing it?
Maybe he makes more fundamental mistakes than a guy at that level should. But that must mean he has an outrageous talent level. He's Brett Favre throwing stupid interceptions because of overconfidence in his abilities.
is very good at putting fish on tilt and causing them to dump him their stack. That's a totally legitimate poker skill that should be applauded, and can go a long way to explaining his success. That doesn't mean that he's great at nuts and bolts poker stuff (he's not), but lacking perfect fundamentals doesn't mean he can't win a lot (Phil Ivey probably has at least slightly worse fundamentals than a lot of the online players that he crushes).
I'm just saying it's weird for Hellmuth to be talking about poker strategy when that's not really his big poker skill.
Are fellow pros who should know better too. So what mistakes are THEY making?
Strategy can be different from x and o's. Technical, knowing the odds, vs. How to handle the game, players, situations. But this is turning into one of those "judge by the stats vs. Intangibles" things in football, so you can have the last word. Good convo though.
AAB, while most of us would say "well you cleary don't raise with JJ and then fold when you only have 15 bb's left" you have to realize there's some strategy there. It may seem like it's your last best shot, but the whole point of tournament/live play is that you cannot just make up a rule based on the odds.
Helmuth probably put the guy on a better hand and that decision was probably based on that player's previous actions over a course of dozens of hands.
Phil also made the point when color commentating that most non-professionals think you need to get aggressive much earlier than when the pros think you do. I think he was asked when he feels he needs to start playing desperate and he said no sooner than 10-15 bbs left. I think the difference is that the pros are so better at putting people on hands that it doesn't take a monster hand for them to win a pot, so they can be more conservative in that regard.
Also, it just sounds silly to say one of, if not the, best tournament players in the world doesn't know basic fundamentals. He does. Just because you think he makes some bad plays based on a tiny TV sample size (which will certainly show Phil busting out, but not necessarily him building his stack) doesn't mean he has poor fundamentals.
I definitely understand where a lot of the criticism comes from. He admittedly has a non conventional take on how to play relatively short stacks.
I think Hellmuth's "mistakes" fall into a few different classifications:
1. Making it more impossible to "read" him by not falling into patterns.
2. Sometimes, he is tired of fighting "bad cards," decides he is finished, and goes FTS.
3. Calculated risks that don't always work.
Anyone who thinks he doesn't know how to play reminds me of those who said Terry Bradshaw was a "dumb" QB. They don't just give you 11 bracelets for showing up and being stupid.
with 15 big blinds is an unquestioned mathematical mistake. It's not about reads or anything like that. It's just a pure -EV poker play, and a really obvious one.
Except if he correctly put the guy on a ace, king, or queen it is the perfect play.
Exactly...you have to be very careful in critiquing a player (esp one as successful as Phil) because the plays may be perceived as wrong may be a profitable part of their game when taken in context with their overall strategy, image and approach to the game. I respect that there there is a fairly standard book on how to play a lot of situations...but when evaluating players who deviate from that conventional wisdom you have to take into account their profitability over time with their non conventional play. That's not to say that Phil and other very successful players don't/can't have leaks in their game that need to be plugged. I just think he's earned a little bit more "benefit of the doubt" than he typically gets...in large part because of the arrogance he's displayed over the years.
And anyone who thinks Hellmuth is always right when it comes to MTT strategy is crazy. I'm not saying he doesn't know how to play. He has a few glaring holes in his game, though. There's really no disputing that.
The online stream the year Jamie Gold won was the best poker broadcast I had ever seen at that time and it was probably mostly due to Hellmuth. I was very surprised at how well he came off.
billy kopp says hi
but I think this was worse. I mean, he just opened 33 to a standard size rather than open shoving even though he only had 20 big blinds, then fricking flat called a 3 bet, putting a third of his stack in the middle and only leaving himself a pot-sized bet behind with a baby pair. Then he shoved with absolutely no fold equity over a guy who probably isn't bluffing him very often (if ever) in that spot. Just atrocious.
Kopp at least went broke with a flush. Hellmuth went broke with 33 on a king high flop in a 3 bet pot.
lolol yeah i hadn't even read hellmuth's bustout hand yet
Some of his play <30bbs is so fundamentally fucked it amazes me that he can still manage to score occasionally in nlhe mtts. Yeah Deeb attributes his run this year partially to some advice he received from PH but whatever. There's a big difference between passing up small edges and avoiding coinflips in slow structures and folding QQ pf with 15bbs, which I'm pretty sure I saw Hellmuth do on PAD last year.
I miss Norman Chad. I am a big poker fan, but not seeing the hands is not good for TV, in my useless opinon!
is as boring as watching paint dry. I tried to watch it one evening this week while I was running on the treadmill (there was no baseball on, so it must have been wed. or thur., sine the Tigers were off), and it was so unwatchable (to me) that I actually ended up watching My First Place or House Hunters (I can't remember which) on HGTV instead. before you judge me, both the individual looking for a house and the real estate agent had great cans.
It was probably more exciting than the baseball. (I mean really, glass houses there).
I think they really need to bring back the pocket card cam. If I want to think and try to figure out what hand people were betting with, I'd just go online and play poker myself...
A week from Tuesday. They're just not showing it pre-flop during the live. To some negative effect.
I am horribly bored by it. People always talk about the Moneymaker Effect of Hold Em going big time but it also coincided with them starting to use the hole cam to make watching poker interesting. I remember watching some of the old WSOP main events on ESPN Classic or something where Phil Hellmuth is one of the announcers and it's all conjecture like it is now.
If you want to know what it's like to not see the hole cards then go grab a group of friends and start a home game of your own or go to the casino and play in a tourney.
I do like not knowing the results about which pros are still left and who are the chip leaders but it has gotten just painful to watch now.