« New Site | Main | One Year Of Playing Poker For A Living »
 | |
| Latest poker news |
June 11, 2004
Mulligans
Someone left a comment on my site, which may or may not appear on the new page. So just in case it is lost in the shuffle here it is:
well, I'm gonna have to give you a mulligan on this one. Since I came to this site via HDouble's page I'll assume there is something of value here. If you don't know who Ashley is then you obviously are not fully immersed in the poker world. He's a regular poster on RGP and an excellect hold'em and stud player, as I have played with him in person and attended his well run charity poker tournaments in Boston. To put his quote in context, he was replying to all the people who think that Raymer was a lucky internet amateur, a MoneyMaker clone, who, through dumb luck beat out 2600+ other players. Anyone familiar with Greg knows this to be ridiculous, as he's a high-limit regular at Foxwoods and a well-read poster on RGP and 2+2. It's like the Marlin's winning the World Series, people will say the Yankees were the better team, but they lost, the Marlin's won and without any better means to compare them than head-to-head competition you'd have to say the Marlin's were the best team in baseball. And so, on those 5 days at Binion's Raymer was the best NL hold'em player. Of course, on paper, the Yankee's were the better team and at the WSOP there were many, many players who were, on paper, better players. Ashley was just giving Greg his due. As far as calling his book rubbish based on misinterpreting this post, I don't think that's fair. Go out and buy it, read it and then tell me what you think of it.
Well I have no idea how good or bad Raymer is myself, but I understand your (and Ashley’s) point that he isn’t simply a Moneymaker or Varkonyi. Still winning the WSOP does NOT make him the best player. The major difference between baseball and poker is the luck factor. If the Yankees and the Marlins play head to head the team that plays better will win every time. I suppose if both teams are very closely matched one could play slightly better and still lose to bad officiating or something, but this is a rarity. If the Marlins beat the Yankees in the World Series (Of Baseball, that is) it is because they played better. Not that they are necessarily a better team, but that they played better in that seven game series.
Chess is similar. Every player has good days and bad days. If I played Kasparov heads up enough times I would beat him sooner or later. And I would beat him because I played that one game better than he did. I would not be a better player than him, but I would have played better than he did for one game.
So let’s assume poker was not a game of luck, and that whoever played best always won. Even if this were the case (which it most definitely is not) it would not make Greg Raymer the best player in the world. It would make him the player who played best for one tournament. Those are two very different things.
Poker however has a luck factor. You and I could play heads up for any amount of money, even for 5 days straight and you could play better than me the whole time and still end up losing to me. Anyone who does not understand this simple concept does not understand poker, and therefore I would not want to read their book. I am sure that in fact Ashley probably does understand this and would see the flaw in his logic immediately, or at least I hope so.
So Greg Raymer’s winning the WSOP does not make him the best no limit tournament player in the world. It doesn’t even mean he played better than everyone else in that tournament. In fact really all it does mean is that he is now a wealthy individual. He may or may not be an excellent player. Hell, he may in reality be (though I doubt it) the best player alive, but if he is it isn’t because he won one tournament, even if it was the WSOP. Hence I found that quote to be entirely flawed and worthy of the “Stupid Quote Of The Day” title. If anyone needs a mulligan here it is Ashley Adams.
Posted by themaroon at June 11, 2004 9:19 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.thepokerchronicles.com/mt-tb.cgi/227
Comments
I came across this interesting thread while sleepless in the middle of the night. Interesting opinions. Here are my thoughts. I stated that Raymer was the greatest no limit tournament player in the world because by winning the largest, most visible, high stakes no limit tournament in the world I figured he had at least as valid a claim on this "title" as anyone else. To me it's comparable to calling the winner of the Olympic hundred meter dash the "fastest man in the world"
Posted by: Ashley Adams at July 28, 2004 10:47 AM