Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 







Local Walls


Everything posted by FenwayKing

  1. So someone told me about this and just wanted to say a couple things: 1) The only reason I didn't respond to Luke's diatribe vs. me isn't because I think I'm too good to respond to him or anything, but mainly because I don't want to get into a debate about my character on Twitter. It's completely unproductive and isn't going to prove anything either way. Have I said some arrogant things on Twitter? Sure no doubt (I will say that some of them were tongue-in-cheek because I know people think I'm very arrogant so was just playing off that). I like to think that most people who have met me though don't find me that way. If not, well I'm sorry for that but I don't think I'm this arrogant douche who blows everyone off all the time. I don't deny that some of Luke's criticism is warranted but not responding to him was mainly because I don't think arguing about on Twitter accomplishes anything. 2) I don't post here anymore or read the forums because I simply don't have the time to anymore. When I was hyper-posting on here I was in college and other than cramming for exams had a lot of free time where I could read and post etc. The time I had here was extremely fun, I learned a lot about things, made some great friends, and I do miss just being able to sit around for hours shooting the shit but I simply don't have the time having a "real job" or whatever now. The problem isn't that I'm too good for OT; OT just consumes too much time when I have a relatively shortened time frame to maximize my earning potential in poker. Even though everyone thinks I'm "hollywood from OT," whenever I'm in Vegas I'm still always down to say hi, meet up with people etc. I just can't really post on here without it being a major distraction to me. Anyway, thanks to the friends who did support me on here and I think most of the people who don't like me, they never did like me and that's alright with me.
  2. Is someone consolidating all these? Assume most websites will be taken down eventually
  3. the thing with ppl hating on foles is even if he's not necessarily the greatest or more talented than a bunch of other QBs is that he has a great offensive system and the best playcaller in the league. Systems matter. We can make a big hullabaloo about how the system is "making" him but is anyone really going to care if he's putting up a 30-10 every year (obv 27-2 was just insane but even if he regressed to that he'd have some of the best stats in the league.) QBs/systems/surrounding talent etc are so inextricably linked that it's pretty likely Foles continues to put up top 10 stats over the next few years imo
  4. FenwayKing

    The Leftovers

    yea because cults usually define themselves as such...
  5. don't you think the logical assumption would be that someone who follows the tourney scene more closely (me) would have a much clearer idea than someone who clearly doesn't (you)? Nope, seems to make more sense to say "LEVEL??" without even doing a cursory search on google to see if maybe there's a reason I was saying that. That's what I don't understand---you freely admit you don't really know but still assume there's no reason to say that. btw the year Ivey made it, other than him, no one else would rank in the top 100 tourney players.
  6. why would it be? Dan is one of the 5 best tournament players in the world by anyone's measure, Martin's probably top 15-25 and Craig's in the top 50-100. Considering the remaining field, the other 6 likely won't be fish so doesn't even seem like much of a stretch to say that Name another year where it would even be close?
  7. if craig, martin and dan all ft it might be the most talented wsop main ft ever
  8. To this I say: but I'm sure you've done a lot of math on BRM and risk of ruin and variance which leads to your conclusion that Waco is a scumbag...
  9. yo waco i owe you 1757 from the PLH so plus this 175 is 1932, just call it 1930? im playing 1c and can have it on me tmrw
  10. he auctioned..and obv we are just guesstimating based on field quality/our own perceived edges. No one actually knows (shrug). I think the ME is underpriced generally and 1500s/1ks are overpriced (haven't bought any action 4 years running) but most ppl don't. Structure/field quality/perceived skill etc are all important factors though of course. Other things matter too---someone like Negreanu or Hellmuth have even bigger edges in tourneys like the main (eg: I wouldn't swap with Hellmuth in a 5k tournament but I would be thrilled to swap with him in the main as ppl will just gift him---he prob has the 3rd highest ROI in the main after Ivey and Negreanu). There's obv tons of factors and no one really "knows" but yea shrug
  11. looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool is this real you sold at 1.4 to a 1k turbo
  12. def a bigger problem with collusion in this type of situation since competing bidders are likel to know each other fairly well. good point bigger field size increases your variance sure; that's why buying highroller action is actually pretty low variance (and why such a market has sprung up for it recently). my point is twofold, dont think your average grinder makes as much as they think in the main/good players have higher ROIs than ppl are willing to pay for
  13. if you're selling 10 total whatever price the guy who buys the last percent pays everyone pays so that way the other guy doesnt get screwed
  14. i think he ended up going at 3-1 or something for the main which I think is relatively close but prob around his ROI. I think main action tends to be the most inefficient of markets (ppl are willing tot pay 1.3 for shitty grinders but balk at paying high mu for great players whose edges are magnified immensely in a tourney with an amazing structure). Obv there is a cutoff point at some point but ya. I think that's the point he was trying to prove by selling that 10% btw---doesn't need to sell but main event prices are pretty off. Timex won't even let me buy an extra 10% of myself at 2.3 to 1 (swapped a bunch so wanted a bit more of myself) that being said a shitty grinder did win last yr so there you go :D
  15. "I'll be auctioning where everyone gets the same rate as the 10th highest percent(ie if A bids 1% for $250, B bids 5% for $1000, C bids $1600 for 10%, A gets 1% for 160, B gets 5% for 800, C gets 4% for 640). Right now as an example we have 1% Carl_lafong 275 1% Blopp 270 2% kcbj6 500 10% NF 2400 If no one else were to bid, they would get 1%, 1%, 2% and 6% respectively for $240 each. All bids must exceed $240 but do not have to exceed $275. For instance if I received only one other bid of 3% for $750, they would get 3% of the action NF wanted for $720" that's how timex did it which i think is a pretty good way of going about it fyi.
  16. is the auction similar to timex's in 2+2? ie say 10% is sold will the biggest buys that add up to 10% be honored but they all pay the same price?
  17. that's ringelsdorf online, good mid-hs online reg
  18. they're engaged? lol guy moves quick; she was dealing to me in the M 2500 last year and she said she had just broken up with the guy in seat 1 at our table (lol he got showered AA to QJs when she was dealing)
  19. skimmed thread, nothing to add except checking a bluff for "pot control" doesn't really make sense

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.