T1B

is underway...

was reading tao of poker...bunch of people playing in the $2250 satellites for this event...WOW...

guess this event has also come down to stakers and their stables of horses...well known that Lindgren stakes a few guys in this event...don't know what the deal is...but hey he probably ponies up say 10-25% of buy in etc...

who knows...so many background stakes, etc...

My friend's friend played I believe it was Event 39. It was a $1500 NL Hold Em.

Dude said it was a lot of the pros killing time, and a bunch of douchebags. To a pro/wannabe pro, $1500 isn't a lot of money. To this Average Joe, it was a bunch, but he ponied up because he wanted to play in the WSOP, something of a dream for him.

And he (along with some reporters) said it was an absolute donkfest.

Even the pros were playing it like an online freeroll. He held out for some fatties, and got his high pair cracked by a 4-5-off or some shit.

Dude was pretty much heartbroken. I didn't realize shit like that went on at the WSOP. Hell, I don't see that kind of play in any tourney over a $20 buy-in, generally. But apparently it was the pros (I'll get names later) that started the "lotto poker" thing, becuase they apparently just didn't give a shit about the $1500, and were going for the home-run-for-a-bracelet.

Dinsdale wrote:I didn't realize shit like that went on at the WSOP. Hell, I don't see that kind of play in any tourney over a $20 buy-in, generally.

You're one of the lucky ones then. This kind of shit happens quite frequently when we are playing in some $20 buy-ins down here. We get some guys who play at the country club all the time carrying 4 digit bank rolls in their money clip and if there isn't a good big game going on, then they will just kill time playing the less enticing action. And they don't give a shit.

There was some asshole playing with us one night paying to see every flop without even looking at his cards and he was cracking bullets, cowboys, fishhooks with his 3 7 offsuit. It pissed everyone off and kind of put a dent in that group's desire to play.

Shit like that is why I now play in more expensive games with $50 and $100 buy-ins. People around here start to respect that number and want to win legit.

I imagine the same thing goes on at those $1500 rolls as compared to the the bigger games.

In some of the home games I occasionally play, that happens with $10 buy in and $5 rebuys. The hosts found that limiting or eliminating rebuys calms things down.

buy ins are horrible

some players go allin with shit. their goal, to build up stacks of players, so when he's ready to play, he can build up a huge stack, with all of the chips he gave to the table.


i played in a buyin tourney in vegas, this guy bought in 20 times. then all of a sudden he is the chip leader, and im stuck with what i have, no add on, just rebuy. i was the chip leader, now he has 80% of the chips at the table from all of the players he gave big chip stacks too.

it was stupid.

Adelpiero wrote:buy ins are horrible

some players go allin with shit. their goal, to build up stacks of players, so when he's ready to play, he can build up a huge stack, with all of the chips he gave to the table.


i played in a buyin tourney in vegas, this guy bought in 20 times. then all of a sudden he is the chip leader, and im stuck with what i have, no add on, just rebuy. i was the chip leader, now he has 80% of the chips at the table from all of the players he gave big chip stacks too.

it was stupid.

If one person is bringing it all it isn't wise to continue the practice but in large rebuy tournies building the stacks at your table is the object. If you have the money to continue rebuying through at least 6 all ins you should have gone in at least three times before the cut off. Especially in an 8 table or larger tournament. If you don't and you are the person who plays solid after the cut off it really doesn't matter when you brake down to about 3 tables you realize that you are covered in chips by 3 out of every four players sometimes as much as 10 to 1.

i would of loved to take his chips, he donated to build up the table, but horrible hands and him allin every hand, held me to 2000-4000k in chips and suddenly hes leading the tourney, with his chips!


minimal buyin and add ons are ok. limit to 2-3 buy ins. unlimited is stupid. and takes forever. ends up too many chips in play.

Adelpiero wrote:i would of loved to take his chips, he donated to build up the table, but horrible hands and him allin every hand, held me to 2000-4000k in chips and suddenly hes leading the tourney, with his chips!


minimal buyin and add ons are ok. limit to 2-3 buy ins. unlimited is stupid. and takes forever. ends up too many chips in play.

That's why there should be a brake, a chip up add on, and no rebuys after the brake.