Poker's equivalent of a 147 break?

Fatboydim

What do you think is poker’s equivalent of a 147 break in snooker.

I would say something like winning five STTs in a row. I think Amaru is the only person I know who has done this.

Within a game it might be winning 7 hands in a row.

So what’s Poker’s 147?

roryc

Winning an 9 or 10 player STT in one hand. Everyone all in first hand. Will never happen...

PPP-Pit Boss

roryc wrote:

Winning an 9 or 10 player STT in one hand. Everyone all in first hand. Will never happen...

Great paradigm. But is there not too much luck involved?

Would one not have to outplay rather than outdraw?

Winning a game as a direct result of outplaying your opponent with the underdog hand consistantly.

Dub13

I would say something along the lines of going from "a chip and a chair" (I hate that saying) to being chip leader.

bmc

Winning an STT in which your stack size ALWAYS increased and never decreased. I.E. Any pot you were involved in, you won. Maybe you could excuse the blinds...

careca

Dan Harringtons performance of reaching two WSOP Main Event Final tables in a row. Over 800 in the first and over 2500 in the next.

Or possibly Noels Furlongs win. Never had all his chips at stake throughout the whole tournament. Anytime he was allin he had the other players covered.

They would be my equivalent.

And remember there can be luck involved in a snooker 147. Cliff Thorburns first televised 147 started off with an outrageous fluke.

jem

Dub13 wrote:

I would say something along the lines of going from "a chip and a chair" (I hate that saying) to being chip leader.

Well I have had a 147 so, chip chair after first hand of final 2 tables in Kildare tourney to leading in heads up, lost it in end but thats another story( warning bad beat post a possibility )

califano

I usually use darts parlance if im up against it. Like if im all in with 9 10 v AA then nothing short of a 170 checkout will do to win the leg.

If i have JJ v KK then i need a shanghai checkout to win the leg. 'shanghied on 20's'!

Lex

Winning a 10 player Sit and Go where you knock out ALL the other players during the game.
e.g. in a scalps game where you hold all the scalps at the end.

Dub13

Lex wrote:

Winning a 10 player Sit and Go where you knock out ALL the other players during the game.
e.g. in a scalps game where you hold all the scalps at the end.

That sounds about right.

shoutman

well i did play a stt where i knocked every single player out, whenever i bluffed they folded when ever i raised with a good hand they re raised and i won.

A lot of it was down to luck though, although I was ahead in all show downs some were 50/50.

For me the 147 of poker is playing a perfect gam, making all the right calls, always going into a showdown with the best hand. Knowing when to bluff, knowing when he has you beat.
Never second guessing yourself and leaving the table having won or lost knowing that you did not make one mistake.

kincsem

Winning two large field MTTs in a row -
either at a major festival or on a major site like PokerStars.

I hit a 147 out-shot once: treble 19, treble 20, double 15. What a player! - it's my highest darts outshot.

kincsem

careca wrote:

And remember there can be luck involved in a snooker 147. Cliff Thorburns first televised 147 started off with an outrageous fluke.

I think he had 151, a 4 penalty by the other player to start, then a 147 break.

Culchie

kincsem wrote:

I hit a 147 out-shot once: treble 19, treble 20, double 15. What a player! - it's my highest darts outshot.

You should have gone treble 19, treble 18, double 18.

You don't need to re-adjust around the board as much.;)

jimbling

Fatboydim wrote:

What do you think is poker’s equivalent of a 147 break in snooker.

I would say something like winning five STTs in a row. I think Amaru is the only person I know who has done this.

Within a game it might be winning 7 hands in a row.

So what’s Poker’s 147?

there is, without any doubt, no equivalent in poker... none even close. All those feats mentioned are just that.

A 147 represents a perfect game of snooker, in the same way a 180 represents a perfect throw in darts, and a 300 is a perfect game in bowling..... But other games do not, and can not have equivalents.

There is no perfect game in poker

Samba

My personal best is 18 consecutive 1v1 $200 STT wins on tribeca

karlh

Samba wrote:

My personal best is 18 consecutive 1v1 $200 STT wins on tribeca

:eek:

Samba

:eek:

I know, some achievement. My HU instincts were finely tuned at the time, it was around August, sure you can go through my account and have a look for yourself Karl


From $900 I built up 15k in the space of around 3 Weeks. What followed was a travesty.

Playing 20/40 Limit and doing very well for a week until I hit a wall of outdraws, suckouts & gutshots etc.

One day Findnemo, a good Limit player who will drive you up the wall was at my table, he sucked out on my again & again & again. I was steaming and called upon the Fish calling mantra.

He then asked me to play him HU 50/100 Limit and I obliged, oh the sickness, the guy will raise & re-raise on a gutshot and hit, he took me for 8k and 2 weeks of tilt followed, depleting all 15k of the winnings i had previously built from 900.

Bankroll management folks, It's hars lesson to learn and still do this day I lack discipline in bankroll management.


Which is why.... dun dun dun.

I have actually decided that Saturday was my last Poker Tournament for the forseeable future.

It's time to focus energy elsewhere.

careca

Samba wrote:

I know, some achievement. My HU instincts were finely tuned at the time, it was around August, sure you can go through my account and have a look for yourself Karl


From $900 I built up 15k in the space of around 3 Weeks. What followed was a travesty.

Playing 20/40 Limit and doing very well for a week until I hit a wall of outdraws, suckouts & gutshots etc.

One day Findnemo, a good Limit player who will drive you up the wall was at my table, he sucked out on my again & again & again. I was steaming and called upon the Fish calling mantra.

He then asked me to play him HU 50/100 Limit and I obliged, oh the sickness, the guy will raise & re-raise on a gutshot and hit, he took me for 8k and 2 weeks of tilt followed, depleting all 15k of the winnings i had previously built from 900.

Bankroll management folks, It's hars lesson to learn and still do this day I lack discipline in bankroll management.


Which is why.... dun dun dun.

I have actually decided that Saturday was my last Poker Tournament for the forseeable future.

It's time to focus energy elsewhere.

Fair play to you Samba for stating both sides of the story. Lots of people would say 'I won 15K last month' and forget to mention the fact that they lost it back.

I cleared my credit card this year on a good two week run, then maxed it out again on a horrendous run.

i have finally cut back to limits I can handle and I wont even mention the variance in omaha

Samba

The truth can hurt but then the truth is important.

I would not even call it a run, I have come to some conclusions from patterns in my play.

It tends to go like this, I will make a deposit, from that deposit i have a view to build on this deposit, which I successfully do every time.

I then move up the stakes slowly allowing for 10x buyins for 1v1.

It's scarey how consistently I have been able to win 1v1, at one point all i played was 1v1, i would without hesitation call an allin bet with A high if i was confident with my reads.

Then i hit a hiccup, i step out of my limits, greed can hold a powerful grip, when variance kicks me in the ass it hurts more so than it normally would. As I have exceeded my bankroll limitations and so the loss comes across as far more of a blow than it should be.

Then my frame of mind has been adversly altered, I now want to make back loss, not continue building. And so play is affected by this constant thought of recouping loss.

The key to winning 1v1 is forgetting those chips on the table have value, it's a game and you play the game, not the money.

This is impossible when you are chasing back loss.

So, i have come to the conclusion, while i have great skills at poker, I lack in the area of discipline, discipline is a one of many factors that makes a successful poker player.

So hence, i cannot call myself a good player.

roryc

Dub13 wrote:

I would say something along the lines of going from "a chip and a chair" (I hate that saying) to being chip leader.

Did that in the fitz. Came back from a single orange 25 chip to win the tourney.

Lex wrote:

Winning a 10 player Sit and Go where you knock out ALL the other players during the game.
e.g. in a scalps game where you hold all the scalps at the end.

Did this before too in a 9 seater. Just need a good start. I think I knocked three people out the first hand, then just dominated the game. Not really as difficult as it sounds, and I'm sure a few players have done it before. Winning EVERY scalp in a 30+ player game would be an unbelievable achievement!

Samba wrote:

My personal best is 18 consecutive 1v1 $200 STT wins on tribeca

:eek: is right!
LEGEND ! !

jimbling wrote:

There is no perfect game in poker

We'll find something...

jimbling

Samba wrote:

So, i have come to the conclusion, while i have great skills at poker, I lack in the area of discipline, discipline is a one of many factors that makes a successful poker player.

So hence, i cannot call myself a good player.

I think this is very important, and is something a lot of people find hard to come to terms with. They find it difficult to not seperate tilts from ones ability to play poker.


And I also think this comes into the debate about players professing they are winning players when they're not. They block out the massive tilt losses as they 'think' its not directly related to there skill. i.e. I can be a winning player, I have the abililty. Even though their tilt losses outweigh their skillfull wins.

jimbling

roryc wrote:

We'll find something...

lol... i dont think so rory


all you'll find is great achievements....

Samba

My tilt loss did not outweigh my skill gains. Correct bankroll management was my biggest weakness.

I can handle bad beats and take them in my stride, but when you take a bad beat for half your roll, this induces Super Tilt!


I may make a return to the table but for the time being, i have decided to go full throtle ahead with a business plan I am currently working on. (non poker related )

jimbling

Samba wrote:

My tilt loss did not outweigh my skill gains. Correct bankroll management was my biggest weakness.

I can handle bad beats and take them in my stride, but when you take a bad beat for half your roll, this induces Super Tilt!


I may make a return to the table but for the time being, i have decided to go full throtle ahead with a business plan I am currently working on. (non poker related )

I was in no way implying that you were one of those players. I know you are a good player, and have been successfull in making decent money from poker. I was just adding to your point.

From previous postings of money earned by you, I would think it would be far more advisable to learn self control rather than just give up poker. Although if this business plan is something you want to do then go for it.

BigDragon

Samba wrote:

The key to winning 1v1 is forgetting those chips on the table have value, it's a game and you play the game, not the money.

This is impossible when you are chasing back loss.

So, i have come to the conclusion, while i have great skills at poker, I lack in the area of discipline, discipline is a one of many factors that makes a successful poker player.

So hence, i cannot call myself a good player.

Step 1 Change "1 v 1" to Poker
Step 2 Copy and paste into Word
Step 3 Increase Font Size
Step 4 Print
Step 5 Frame
Step 6 Hang above monitor
Step 7 Read every session
Step 8 Be a better player

Great post Samba. GG and GL with whatever you do....but do comeback, refreshed and wiser.

padser

jimbling wrote:

there is, without any doubt, no equivalent in poker... none even close. All those feats mentioned are just that.

A 147 represents a perfect game of snooker, in the same way a 180 represents a perfect throw in darts, and a 300 is a perfect game in bowling..... But other games do not, and can not have equivalents.

There is no perfect game in poker

Not true. On so many levels.
a) 147 does not represent the perfect game in snooker. Iv seen ROS or MW make breaks of 70/80 that were far far more difficult then some of the 147's that have been achieved. Conversely i remember a 147 made by ronnie where he was almost never in position, he hit 5/6 wonderful recovery shots since he kept loosing position. Unbelievable stuff, but certainly not a 'perfect game'.

b) I would say poker does have a perfect game, certainly a perfect hand. Any hand where you have won, and have extracted the max chips possibly from your opponent surely was a 'perfect hand'. How could it be improved upon?

hotspur

Winning a MTT where the only hand you show down is the winning hand HU has got to be pretty close.

oq4v3ht0u76kf2

Ya gotta remember, a 147 constitutes one perfect frame in a MATCH of snooker... applying the logic to poker would seemingly mean that you would have had to play a perfect HAND, not necessarily a tournament or game.

jimbling

padser wrote:

Not true. On so many levels.
a) 147 does not represent the perfect game in snooker. Iv seen ROS or MW make breaks of 70/80 that were far far more difficult then some of the 147's that have been achieved. Conversely i remember a 147 made by ronnie where he was almost never in position, he hit 5/6 wonderful recovery shots since he kept loosing position. Unbelievable stuff, but certainly not a 'perfect game'.

First off, what are all these levels you speak of

Yes, I did think about this and I do get your point. But what I said was a 147 represents a perfect game. You can not get a better score in any one frame. No matter what other way you played it, you COULD NOT improve on the points achieved.

padser wrote:

b) I would say poker does have a perfect game, certainly a perfect hand. Any hand where you have won, and have extracted the max chips possibly from your opponent surely was a 'perfect hand'. How could it be improved upon?

There is no way you can compare one hand with a frame of poker. Lets take an example. there are two players heads up. First hand of the tournament. The first goes all in, the second calls. Player1 wins. Do you consider this to be in the same league as a 147? What if player1 wins by an outdraw, is it still a perfect hand?

I just don't think you can base it hand by hand.


But I also don't see why people want an equivalent to a 147. Personally I think its better its not there.

But Realistically, if you really want one. Every time you win an STT or MTT, then thats what your doing. You have won all the chips, no matter what you do you can't improve on that. But again, its not really the same. It's a different game, and can not be measured by such things. thats my view on it anyhow.

Imposter

If you think of a 147 as one of the hardest things to do in snooker then it could possibly be compared it to a very good laydown in poker. You know the type: laying down your quad aces to your opponents royal flush or something.

DubTony

jimbling wrote:

Yes, I did think about this and I do get your point. But what I said was a 147 represents a perfect game. You can not get a better score in any one frame. No matter what other way you played it, you COULD NOT improve on the points achieved.

Actually, you can. Here's me being a pedantic off-topic bastard (again) but Wally West scored a 151 in 1976. Sorry about this, but I can't stop myself.

http://www.snooker.org/plr/records.shtml

.... In the second frame, his opponent clipped the blue and left Wally snookered. Wally potted green as his free ball with a brown to follow. He then took 14 red and blacks and a pink off the last red. He then cleared up to make the 151.

And there are more. Sorry, I can't help it. The "Submit Reply" button is taking over the screen. :eek:
I have to click it, I just have to, I'm so sorry...

jimbling

DubTony wrote:

Actually, you can. Here's me being a pedantic off-topic bastard (again) but Wally West scored a 151 in 1976. Sorry about this, but I can't stop myself.

http://www.snooker.org/plr/records.shtml

.... In the second frame, his opponent clipped the blue and left Wally snookered. Wally potted green as his free ball with a brown to follow. He then took 14 red and blacks and a pink off the last red. He then cleared up to make the 151.

And there are more. Sorry, I can't help it. The "Submit Reply" button is taking over the screen. :eek:
I have to click it, I just have to, I'm so sorry...

lol... your right though, and I should have remembered that too.

Samba

Dear,

What can I say, i have been bankrolled for the pokerevents 500k event by bluesquare poker......

Just when i try to get out......they suck me back in!

Better get some tourney practice in.

I will decide after this tourney what my position is I have every intention of laying down the cards for good, once i have played this tourney.

Rnger

roryc wrote:

Winning an 9 or 10 player STT in one hand. Everyone all in first hand. Will never happen...

eh.... believe or not i won a 10 player PLAY MONEY stt on the 1st hand, on poker room many moons ago with 53h on the big blind (my fav hand since)

Getting a 147 in snooker is skill, the above is not skill.

Lex

There may not be a perfect game of poker, but from Grienstein in Ace on the River there are perfect plays:

"You can't become an expert player unless you are able to determine the perfect way and the correct way to play most hands after seeing your opponent's cards when the hand is over.

Perfect Play:The play that would have been made at each stage of a hand if the opponents hole cards had been known.

Correct Play:Given the information available at the time, the play that yields the best average result."

DubTony

Rnger wrote:

eh.... believe or not i won a 10 player PLAY MONEY stt on the 1st hand, on poker room many moons ago with 53h on the big blind (my fav hand since)

Getting a 147 in snooker is skill, the above is not skill.

If you'd folded pre-flop and gone heads up with the winner and won; that'd be something to talk about.

Bane

Actually the highest break break possible in snooker is 155. Player A fouls and gives free ball before any reds go down, then Player B uses freeball and pots the the black with it adding an extra 8 points to the 147 .