The Ironing Is Delicious
Once again this update comes to you live via other pages on the internet. Apparently the final of the $5000 NL took all of 45 hands to play out. Stuart Fox was heads up having played one hand in the final. It would be a nice problem to have, being in the final and complaining about the structure, but it does seem to be a problem. The consensus at 2+2 is that final tables were taking on average half as long as they did last year, and the limit events are equally affected (if not more so). This seems to be a combination of keeping the levels at 60 minutes in the final (rather than extending to 90 as last year), skipping a level here or there on Day 2 (again compared to 2006) and that old favourite, players hollywooding in the final.
Now, here's where the ironing comes in. These structures were approved by the players advisory committee, Negreanu and so on. The same ones who "approved" the new cards, and were the first to moan about them when they actually played with them. To be fair the players involved did claim that those weren't the cards they approved. In this case, though, the structures were there in black and white, and the players gave them the OK. The 2+2er who made the prop bet with Negreanu (his $250K to DN's $50K that DN won't win a bracelet this year) had a good look at the structures when they came out and predicted exactly what was going to happen at the final tables, that they were going to be very fast. And this was one of the reasons he struck the bet. His understanding of the impact of structure was much better than Negreanu's, even though the latter was on the committee to approve them ! Of course Danny Boy could still come through on the bet, but we're half way through and he's been in one final. That final being ... the shootout, which is not affected by these structure issues !
I wonder how many other prop bets are floating around among the high-rollers. Phil Ivey was supposedly only going to play the 50K HORSE and the Main Event [1], but it transpires that he is on a huge prop bet with someone (maybe even Full Tilt as an incentive for him to play) to win a bracelet. They're even betting on each other, Brunson reportedly scooping $400K via Hellmuth's bracelet win. Whether this will affect the integrity of any events, we'll have to see.
As for me, I played the $1000 @ Venetian yesterday but no good, just one of those days where I couldn't get anything going. I'm in the $2500 Short-handed today which should be fun and, if that doesn't work out, the $2000 Stud tomorrow afternoon.
[1] By the way I'm already tiring of hearing that the 50K HORSE "is the main event". No it isn't. That's like in The Office where Brent and Finchy lose the quiz but when they bet on whether Finch can throw a shoe over the building Brent says "This is the quiz, this is it". The main event is the main event. The 50K HORSE is a big tournament for sure, but remember that it's not so much a measure of who has $50K to play a tournament as much as it is a measure of who can convince someone (whether corporate or individual) to stake them.
Now, here's where the ironing comes in. These structures were approved by the players advisory committee, Negreanu and so on. The same ones who "approved" the new cards, and were the first to moan about them when they actually played with them. To be fair the players involved did claim that those weren't the cards they approved. In this case, though, the structures were there in black and white, and the players gave them the OK. The 2+2er who made the prop bet with Negreanu (his $250K to DN's $50K that DN won't win a bracelet this year) had a good look at the structures when they came out and predicted exactly what was going to happen at the final tables, that they were going to be very fast. And this was one of the reasons he struck the bet. His understanding of the impact of structure was much better than Negreanu's, even though the latter was on the committee to approve them ! Of course Danny Boy could still come through on the bet, but we're half way through and he's been in one final. That final being ... the shootout, which is not affected by these structure issues !
I wonder how many other prop bets are floating around among the high-rollers. Phil Ivey was supposedly only going to play the 50K HORSE and the Main Event [1], but it transpires that he is on a huge prop bet with someone (maybe even Full Tilt as an incentive for him to play) to win a bracelet. They're even betting on each other, Brunson reportedly scooping $400K via Hellmuth's bracelet win. Whether this will affect the integrity of any events, we'll have to see.
As for me, I played the $1000 @ Venetian yesterday but no good, just one of those days where I couldn't get anything going. I'm in the $2500 Short-handed today which should be fun and, if that doesn't work out, the $2000 Stud tomorrow afternoon.
[1] By the way I'm already tiring of hearing that the 50K HORSE "is the main event". No it isn't. That's like in The Office where Brent and Finchy lose the quiz but when they bet on whether Finch can throw a shoe over the building Brent says "This is the quiz, this is it". The main event is the main event. The 50K HORSE is a big tournament for sure, but remember that it's not so much a measure of who has $50K to play a tournament as much as it is a measure of who can convince someone (whether corporate or individual) to stake them.
1 Comments:
Negreanu has already admitted he screwed up in not analysing the structures properly on one of his recent video blogs.
Post a Comment
<< Home