Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

About theman200050

  • Community Level
  • Birthday 01/01/1970


  1. IF you have display port it should work fine. The resolution won't change on your laptop screen, and it may be weird switching from 2560 resoultion to back, but as long as the monitor has display port it should work. I'd be careful with the 2560 x 1080 resolution though. Standard is 2560 x 1440 that's why they cost more. I've never used one personally but from what people have told me the "x 1080" is kind of weird. Again I'd be careful on the "x 1080". 2560 x 1440 is the norm and I'd personally pay more just to have the best. If you're gonna go for the best then the extra $200 or whatever for the one I linked would be worth it imo. I've never had a single problem with mine and they have Displayport, HDMI, and dual link DVI connections if needed.
  2. I'm not a computer expert but my buddy who is said the 1080 is just weird. 2560 X 1440 is standard from what I've heard. And you're desktop should be able to support it for the most part. I have an I5 quad core but I only paid like 600 for my desktop, about 2 years ago, so it's not top of the line by any means. The video card is what you'll probably have to upgrade. In my post above I included a link to frys for the one I use. Resolution. Period. Resolution is the what it's all about. You'll never want to watch anything on a monitor without 2560 resolution again, I can promise you that. No clue. Mine are 27"s. As long as the resolution is 2560 it won't really matter imo. But the Asus one I got was so good I bought another one. And the "tilt swivel" on this one allows you to turn it vertically or move it about a foot up or down, so that's definitely a plus. The dell might be able to do that too though I don't know.
  3. HDMI won't support 2560 unless you tweak it is what I've been told. Display Port and DVI are what I use. Unless you have a gaming desktop then you'll most likely need a video card to run 2 at once. I got this one from Frys for 80 bucks and it's worked perfect. I can run 3 2560's on this card. http://www.frys.com/product/7498025?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
  4. I can't imagine Borgota not blowing the VDSE out of the water. Venetians number have been down for a while, and this one is usually their lowest turnout if I remember right. Borgota has a 3 million GTD main event, while Venetian has a 500k GTD main event. I'd say Borgata hands down, although I do personally love the Venetian. http://www.pokerpages.com/tournament/schedule5631.htm --Venetian http://www.pokerpages.com/tournament/schedule5665.htm --- Borgata Those are links to last years results if you wanna check out the numbers.
  5. Do you know who he is? He's been posting on 2p2 for years helping people out with club services. I'm sure he didn't just figure twoplustwo out on a hunch. The guy plays poker. He may not do it as his sole income, but he's not a fish at that table by far. With the exception of comparing him to JC tran I guess you could say.
  6. "I was witness to the seven guys who busted out last night with their post bust-out interviews with the media. They all say it was a great experience – the time they bring their friends and family together, all the cheering sections, and the support. They have a chance to legitimize what they're doing as a profession… That's enough of a reason to do the November Nine." If I hit 5 numbers on the powerball for 100k, then on the way to cash in the ticket I got in a car accident, it would still be a great experience. Winning money is the great experience, not necessarily everything it took to get it. The part of "have a chance to legitimize what they're doing as a profession" is beyond dumb. First of all, we shouldn't be making the game cater to professionals. True professionals of the game of poker, will adapt whether or not they start you off with 1bb in a tourney. What you guys are trying to do, is recreate a Chris moneymaker, instead of just letting poker naturally make a moneymaker, like it did previously. Let the 2003 Final table come back after 3 months, and see how Moneymaker does. With Fahra, Harrington, Amir Vahedi, David Grey, David Singer, and Jason Lester. Moneymaker would win a fraction of the time if the professionals had 3 months to figure out how to beat him. We would have never had a poker boom. The momentum amateur players ride to winning a tournament, is HUGE. Killing that momentum, for whatever reason you want to make up, is greatly killing their shot at winning that tournament. I don't think anyone in casually plays poker is saying that they'll enter the main event now because they get 3 months to come back if they make the final table. That's nonsense. This does nothing to increase interest in the game, no matter how they try to spin it. Imagine them doing this the year Jamie Gold won it. Watching him play, was one of the most enjoyable times I've ever had watching poker. Not because he was good, because it was fun. You didn't have to be there and beat him, it was fun to just watch him. Because bad players, are fun to watch. Tim tebow was fun as hell to watch, not because he's good, because he seems really stupid. In 2006, people didn't have 3 months to learn how to adapt to a player like that, they just had to play him. If those players, especially Allen Cunningham, would of had 3 months to watch the coverage, and adapt, it would of been a completely different game. Not what tournament poker ACTUALLY is. Bad players ride their momentum, and they need to imo. In all honesty, poker is brutal in so many ways I don't even want to think about it the negatives, but I wouldn't want my friends or family ever playing poker "professionally", but I would love for them all to play recreationally.( is that really not a word, red scribbles under it?) And thank you for trying to "Legitimize my Profession", but if you want to do that then why don't you try help to change legislation instead of coming up with these super cool ideas on how to make poker better for me, since you seem to know everything I want. How about you guys start facilitating chops if you want to legitimize my profession. Things like not being able to chop at a final table, are another HUGE DEAL that really hurts the recreational players. Amateurs don't understand ICM, hell I don't anywhere near as much as I need to, but knowing ICM is huge, especially at final tables like the rio daily deepstacks where the average stack will be anywhere from 5-20bbs. And they're playing for 40k on a 200 dollar buy in, but they can't chop. I know this is about the main event, but I think them not allowing chops, at whatever level, is terrible for the game. Those deepstacks are basically satellites for a lot of the players to be able to play bigger buy-in events. And this "not facilitating" chops policy, is solely the WSOP's policy, from my experiences playing in Vegas at least. And for WSOP events, the people who say you shouldn't be allowed to chop at a final table, just don't understand the variance in tournament poker imo. There's so much variance at final tables, it's ridiculous to not be allowed to chop the money, that is technically yours already anyway. But not allowing them to chop, and not wanting to chop are 2 completely different things. If you think you're better and you can win, then yea, I obviously get that. You definitely shouldn't be forced to chop by any means. But for the amateur players, for the fish, who all would rather chop, why in the world would this not be allowed? Not allowing them to do what they want with their money is like a dictatorship. We're already paying you 3.8 million dollars just to run one tournament, and then you tell us that we have to be in our chair on the first card or you kill our hand, and that you won't facilitate chops? I can't talk in the hand either? Even heads up? And you guys still have the same jank ass poker kitchen? After 3.8 million for a single tourney? And you penalize an old lady for not knowing quad tens was the best hand, even though everyone at the table said that it was obvious she was just a beginner and didn't know better? I've never heard a player in my life say he thought the guys walking behind him saw his cards. I've played over 2 thousand hours of live cash games, and probably 500 live tournaments. I've never heard it one time from a player. But from what I've heard, that seems to be the big reason for why they did it. Sorry got off topic, I'll stop.
  7. The 2560 x 1440 resolution is the key. If you're going to play online for a living, or play a lot of tourneys as you said, then the monitors with that resolution is where you want to head. I can have 20 tables on one monitor with no overlap on this monitor. I'd take this one monitor, over 10 monitors with lower resolution any day. The monitor I showed, was the best price and value for 2560 x 1440 monitors imo. If you just want a monitor with the normal 1920 or whatever resolution, then just go to frys or search through newegg and you can find one for probably 100 bucks. You're not gonna get any "options" with certain low res monitors that are worth taking the time to look for. They're all virtually the same from my experience, at least when dealing with playing online poker. I wouldn't even worry about trying to get a top of the line 24" monitor, I'd just save up and get the 2560. It's such a big difference. And with regards to the benefits, it's a lot easier to watch everything on one monitor, obviously. Moving back and forth between monitors can strain the neck pretty hard imo, but I have 2 of the monitors I listed so it's not like I don't do it. But having 2 1920 resolution monitors is just kind of pointless. I did that when I first started playing, but when I got my first one of these monitors, my only thought was, " I can't believe it took me this long to get this." I don't know, it's more than worth spending the extra money in my opinion. But the size of the monitor like inches means nothing really, it's all about the resolution.
  8. You'd probably have to do some tweaking to your laptop to be able to run this monitor, but it's the nuts by far. For the price its the best 2560 monitor I've found. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236294
  9. If you're in Vegas just go to any smiths and pick up the gift card pictured in the link below. It's worked for me and everyone I've told to use it. It has to be Mastercard though, the Visa one doesn't work http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/13/zjfn.jpg/
  10. Aria daily $125 at 1pm and 7pm. 1pm gets around 80-150, nightly gets around 60-120. 30 minute blind levels, 12k starting stack, and probably as good as it gets for a daily $125. Fridays at Orleans $125 at 7pm usually gets 200 to 300. Structure is meh. If there's not a series going on then the dailies pretty much suck except for those. Venetian has a daily 150 but I don't think it gets that many anymore.
  11. Yea I've probably gone through 20 or so of the cheap $20 mouses just throwing them against walls or whatever since I started playing online. This one I've never even considered picking up and slamming or anything like that. As soon as you open the box it comes in, you know it's top notch.
  12. http://www.quill.com/cordless-optical-mice/cbs/216902.html?cm_mmc=SEM_PLA_T_216902 Hands down best poker purchase I've ever made. I've had this one for 3 years and it's the best mouse that I've ever used by far. Rechargeable and as comfortable as it gets.
  13. Tacos el Gordo between Encore and Riveria has $2 tacos, real fire. Earls Sandwich at Planet Hollywood has like $6 subs. Different types of whole pizzas from grand lux in Venetian are $12 but really good and worth it, the 4 cheese one is the nuts. Hard rock has 7.77 gamblers special, salad, steak, shrimp and potato, I think you have to purchase a drink or something stupid now though.

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.