SPOILER ALERT!!! What do people think of the new WSOP champion?

[Hopin2Steal]

So we have our new champion. He pulled off something rather impressive consdiering chip stacks and all. However, I've reviewed quite a few of his hands where he took other final table participants out. While I think he's probably a better player than, say, Jamie Gold, I question whether he's actually all that good.

SPOILER ALERT!!! READ NO FURTHER!!!













I mean, seriously, he made several incredibly loose calls and sucked out quite a few times. I mean, the final hand seems pretty indicative to me of this. But even where he did have the best hand, like pairing his A5 on the flop against Rahne, how can you make that call after you bet $3 million and your opponent goes all-in for $19 million more? How can you not believe that you are AT A MINIMUM not out-kicked there, much less not believe the other guy has two pair or landed a set? Instead he puts Rahne on a flush draw???? It's an incredible accomplishment to go from the short stack to the winning player but......crazy stuff.

[whataboutj]

As discussed in another thread I think the WSOP ME has become a TV tourney at best. It definitely does not mean the winner is the best in the world/pro poker- in recent years just the luckiest. (even looking at Joe Hachem at the FT when he won it - he calls a raise with connectors and flops the nut straight if I am not mistaken - I do think Joe is a better player than Gold or this years champ.


As for this years winner - I did not get to see all of the FT via internet feed so I will reserve my comments for later. I did see some of the praying he did and think that was annoying at best. On that same note I think that a lot of the new breed of players are annoying with all the hollywooding that goes on - one of the events ESPN air'd had a player who walked completely away from the table on every showdown - to me that is nothing more than showboating for the camera
J

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by Hopin2Steal

While I think he's probably a better player than, say, Jamie Gold, I question whether he's actually all that good.

That's a very generous comment that I don't agree with. He played aggressive, got lucky a few times but unless he's capable of just making some insane/sick reads on his opponent, he is a donkey. I only watched up til the dinner break but I didn't see anything that indicated he was a good player (calling AI from tight alex with JTo). At least Jamie seemed to have a plan about dealing with the other players. Though Jerry didn't discuss his hands like Jamie did, his repeated religious references were just as annoying. Thank *** they didn't continue throughout the night.

A couple of thoughts:

1. I liked PGs comment about how lack of skill can be compensated for by increased aggression.

2. Hopefully everyone thinks this is how you should play poker.

3. I was rooting for Alex or Tuan myself.

[TheMightyJim2k]

this guy is a player with some concept of pot odds and pf aggression, but overall is a horrible player with very little skill or experience. He used a lot of aggression combined with a ton of luck to win the tournament, pretty much the same as Gold. Although honestly I think Gold probably plays better than this guy. Edit: and the other players played awful and basically gave their chips away to him (what the hell were you thinking Hilm and Watkinson!?!?!)

Hachem has proven to be a very solid and skilled tournament pro, Raymer had a ton of experience and obviously a deep understanding of the game, and Monemaker.....well he had a great last name.

Unfortunately the Main Event has become some what of a circus, and the final table play this year may have been the biggest joke yet.

I think the days of the ME champion becoming the ambassador of poker and immediately gaining significant respect for their accomplishment ended last year. Yang is just carrying the torch that Jamie Gold lit last year.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by TheMightyJim2k

this guy is a player with some concept of pot odds and pf aggression, but overall is a horrible player with very little skill or experience. He used a lot of aggression combined with a ton of luck to win the tournament, pretty much the same as Gold. Although honestly I think Gold probably plays better than this guy. Edit: and the other players played awful and basically gave their chips away to him (what the hell were you thinking Hilm and Watkinson!?!?!)

Agreed 1000%. Was there any post flop game played here at all? I don't remember seeing anything in the first few hours. The few hands that weren't folded pf or on the flop seemed to get checked down to the river.

Unfortunately the Main Event has become some what of a circus, and the final table play this year may have been the biggest joke yet.

I think the days of the ME champion becoming the ambassador of poker and immediately gaining significant respect for their accomplishment ended last year. Yang is just carrying the torch that Jamie Gold lit last year.

Agreed 2000%

[Quads]

The Main Event means nothing anymore.
It's the biggest, yes, but it does not show / provide the opportunity for the best of the best to demonstrate their skills in the game of poker.

The "Main Event" has become a buy out / sell out with marketing B.S. drivel, of this online site, that online site, some beer, and a plethora of start up players coming in to stake their claim on popularity, and sell out advertising, rather than the demonstrated skill of the game over the long haul.

That being the case, I think Freddy Deeb did a great job this year. I was pleased to see him take it down. I would have liked to seen Chip Reese go back to back, but Deeb is a fantastic person for the bracelet.

[nygiantsfan3342]

WHo was the last champion that any of ya'll thought SHOULD win? Did any of you like Chris Ferguson, Carlos Mort, Varkonyi, Moneymaker, Raymer, Hachem, or Gold. Nobody thinks the winner is the best. Why not? Remember that we only see 10% of the hands on TV. If the champ sucks so much, how did he get through so many people? I think its just easier to dismiss the winner as being a donkey, or just lucky.

We don't really know until we see how the player does in the future. At least Yang can't be worse for the game than Jamie Gold.

[TheMightyJim2k]

Originally Posted by nygiantsfan3342

WHo was the last champion that any of ya'll thought SHOULD win? Did any of you like Chris Ferguson, Carlos Mort, Varkonyi, Moneymaker, Raymer, Hachem, or Gold. Nobody thinks the winner is the best. Why not? Remember that we only see 10% of the hands on TV. If the champ sucks so much, how did he get through so many people? I think its just easier to dismiss the winner as being a donkey, or just lucky.

We don't really know until we see how the player does in the future. At least Yang can't be worse for the game than Jamie Gold.

I think his final table praying actually bothered me more than JG's antics last year.

jerry yang during an all-in early at the Final Table:

"holy father! let this be the day, i will be your savior, jesus christ!"

say what?

[Quads]

That's the problem with (a lot of poker these days, ESPECIALLY the "ME") is that people are more interested in being on TV, rather than the game of poker itself.

All the praying in the world does nothing to the structure of the deck and the next card that comes off.

Kill all the drama bu11sh!t, forget about the camera(s) and play your game.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by nygiantsfan3342

We don't really know until we see how the player does in the future. At least Yang can't be worse for the game than Jamie Gold.

Having watched the first 3-4 hours of last years FT coverage live (PPV) and the same for this years. From a poker perspective, I'd say Jamie was slightly better than Jerry. Away from the table, I guessing Jerry is probably a nicer person than Jamie.