WSOP $50,000 H.O.R.S.E. Event

Ste05

I've just sat down to watch this and one of the first things I heard made me think.

Phil Ivey said: "The difference between this tournament and the main event, is that some guy that just plays internet poker, cannot win this poker tournament"

Do people agree or disagree?

sikes

Ste05 wrote:

I've just sat down to watch this and one of the first things I heard made me think.

Phil Ivey said: "The difference between this tournament and the main event, is that some guy that just plays internet poker, cannot win this poker tournament"

Do people agree or disagree?

obvioulsy hes right. Its a live tourney, he wouldnt just be playing internet poker if he was playing this event.

Hectorjelly

sikes wrote:

obvioulsy hes right. Its a live tourney, he wouldnt just be playing internet poker if he was playing this event.

haha, this is funny but totally wrong. Read the sentance again!

Imposter

There's so few internet players in the field and the stacks are so deep that I sort of agree. You'd be playing against the best in the world so if you had no live experience you'd be kinda fooked.

bohsman

50,000 starting chips, limit, round of each game. I cant see Jamie Gold or Chris Moneymaker winning this tournament.

sikes

Hectorjelly wrote:

haha, this is funny but totally wrong. Read the sentance again!

i am now very embarrassed. commence mick taking. although i should laugh at Ivey, what a nonsensical thing to say.

cardshark202

The best players in the world are internet players

Ste05

cardshark202 wrote:

The best players in the world are internet players

This is my whole point and basically the debate I was hoping to start.

If you were to give me the 5 best internet players in the world against any 5 of the "known" Poker Superstars and I'd bet my entire BR that over a decent term the internet players would wipe the floor with the superstars, in any Poker discipline.

RasTa

Call.

roryc

also call... maybe even raise

Bp!

Long time no post

very interesting topic Ste,

internet poker made all things poker suddendly global/local, Vegas was the pit so sloth your skills in but now all the young talented Irish/scandies/americans etc could prove thier talent from their bedrooms.

I think the Top internet players are the more than like the best players in the world but poker has changed so much in last few decades its whole approach has to be taken into account.

Id bet most of us would back the high stakes internet players vs Doyle or Tj (lol) etc in an *online* cash game but at the same time we'd all back Dolly (instead of most of the internet guys )60 years ago in a shanty town in dallas!

Good topic

Imposter

I think his point wasn't the the internet players were bad but more like that if they don't have a decent amount of live experience they will have problems due to the amount of pros in the field with a hell of a lot of live experience. The internet players think they can play their same game live, the live players see playing live as a different game to online.

luckylucky

Ste05 wrote:

This is my whole point and basically the debate I was hoping to start.

If you were to give me the 5 best internet players in the world against any 5 of the "known" Poker Superstars and I'd bet my entire BR that over a decent term the internet players would wipe the floor with the superstars, in any Poker discipline.

When it comes to hold'em I agree, but a lot of internet players, including some of the very best afaik have limited if any experience of other games, so when it came to a HORSE event I think my money's on the 5 "known" poker superstars.

roryc

Imposter wrote:

I think his point wasn't the the internet players were bad but more like that if they don't have a decent amount of live experience they will have problems due to the amount of pros in the field with a hell of a lot of live experience. The internet players think they can play their same game live, the live players see playing live as a different game to online.

this is spot on

Goodluck2me

Hectorjelly wrote:

haha, this is funny but totally wrong. Read the sentance again!

why?:o

Ste05

Some interesting points, although IMO the best players in the world in every discipline are internet players and not just in Hold 'Em. Their "normal" game is better then the "Pro's" game, and the slight edge these players might get from having more "Live" experience is more than made up by their superior knowledge of the games and having played more hands than any of them.

Just because there's a higher proportion of known pro's playing compared to internet players, doesn't mean that an internet player can't win the tournament, it just means that the Pro's have a better chance of getting to the final table than in the ME because it isn't as much of a mine field to try to navigate through. But to say an internet player CAN'T win the tournament has to be wrong because IMO the best players in the world in every poker discipline are internet players.

They're not going to be intimidated by the money involved as they play for these kinds of stakes daily so it's not like we're talking about some internet Donk who got lucky in some satellite or another.

bohsman

Ste05 wrote:

so it's not like we're talking about some internet Donk who got lucky in some satellite or another.

I think these are exactly the players Ivey is talking about

roryc

Ste05 wrote:

Some interesting points, although IMO the best players in the world in every discipline are internet players and not just in Hold 'Em. Their "normal" game is better then the "Pro's" game, and the slight edge these players might get from having more "Live" experience is more than made up by their superior knowledge of the games and having played more hands than any of them.

Just because there's a higher proportion of known pro's playing compared to internet players, doesn't mean that an internet player can't win the tournament, it just means that the Pro's have a better chance of getting to the final table than in the ME because it isn't as much of a mine field to try to navigate through. But to say an internet player CAN'T win the tournament has to be wrong because IMO the best players in the world in every poker discipline are internet players.

They're not going to be intimidated by the money involved as they play for these kinds of stakes daily so it's not like we're talking about some internet Donk who got lucky in some satellite or another.

couldnt disagree more....

Dont get me wrong, I know there are some excellent high stakes online players, but they are only good ONLINE.

A friend of mine is the all Ireland Pro Evolution Soccer champ, does this mean hes a great footballer? I know this is a bad example, but Im trying to say theres a lot more to poker than the theory.

Live is a totally different game, and the truly great players will be able to excel in both live and online.

I seriously doubt the best player in the world is an online player. IMO the only true way of gauging this is live tournament wins.

Mr. Flibble

I hate to point this out but many of the 'top live pros' play online alot now aswell which really blurrs the argument. Have a look at the big games on Full Tilt to watch.

sikes wrote:

obvioulsy hes right. Its a live tourney, he wouldnt just be playing internet poker if he was playing this event.

I would say Ivey is wrong. Like this event, if a player played the ME he too wouldn't be an internet only player therefore there is no difference

delanec8

These discussions are pretty pointless imo. Ive read so many threads about this type of thing and ive come to the conclusion that i dont care who the best players are.

Whoever has made the most money playing poker is the best player so from what i have heard that is Chip Reese so he is the best. If some 18 year old is crushing the highest stakes online cash games for more than Reese or Ivey make live or on the internet then he is the best player in the world.

Summary: Who gives a toss?

EDIT: Needless to say im disregarding Jamie Gold from this

cardshark202

roryc wrote:

couldnt disagree more....

Dont get me wrong, I know there are some excellent high stakes online players, but they are only good ONLINE.

A friend of mine is the all Ireland Pro Evolution Soccer champ, does this mean hes a great footballer? I know this is a bad example, but Im trying to say theres a lot more to poker than the theory.

Live is a totally different game, and the truly great players will be able to excel in both live and online.

I seriously doubt the best player in the world is an online player. IMO the only true way of gauging this is live tournament wins.

Yikes. Just watch high stakes poker. So many donk plays its unreal. Phil Ivey may be a great player but there are a lot of players who are better then him, and they all play online.
I used to be of the same opinion as you until I started to understand the game better. This is not intended as a swipe at you, I just disagree.

careca

First of all I think we need to differentiate between online players and pro poker players. Just because a pro happens to also play online, does not (imo) make him/her, what Ivey refers to as, an online player. ie. Is ken doherty a snooker player who happens to play online poker or an online poker player who plays snooker. Choice of phrase is important here.

And I totally agree with Bohsman that Ivey is referring to the majority of poor internet players, not the .5% or ever .01% of players who are top notch and a match for the 'pros' over a period of time.

cooker3

I would still say for the horse event, that b&m pros if you want to use that term would fare better then internet pros especially ones in big game purely because they play so many games and I would hazard a guess play more stud and razz then the typicle online pro

Imposter

Phil Ivey wrote:

The difference between this tournament and the main event, is that some guy that just plays internet poker, cannot win this poker tournament

The important word is in bold above.

sikes

goodluck2me wrote:

why?:o

Ivey says that the difference between the two events is that someone who JUST plays online cannot win.

Its in fact a similarity as someone who just plays internet poker wouldnt be playing live poker.

The difference between this tournament and the main event, is that some guy that just plays internet poker, cannot win this poker tournament

bops

online and live poker are basically 2 seperate games imho:

poker is basically about figuring out if your hand is better than your opponents - yes?

online - you figure this out by your opponents actions - eg bet size.

a professional (live) player does this also - but puts much emphasis (in general) on his ability to read his opponent in other ways (eg facial expressions etc etc)

Many live professionals find online poker very difficult due to the fact that they cannot make these reads.

Most "internet only" players cannot make these reads in live games.

so it's kinda obvious to me that the winner of the HORSE event would not be an "internet only" player

i believe that the best poker player in the world cannot be an internet-based player - since internet poker is not true poker (for the above reasons)

- that's not to say that the most successful poker player in the world is (probably) an internet player.

Silver-Tiger

Sorry lads i know this has been on a previous thread, but what episode is the H.O.R.S.E

Cheers

roryc

bops wrote:

since internet poker is not true poker

Its so nice hearing this from other people