Williams, Raymer, and Harrington WSOP accomplishments - Page 2

bonchkid · #11 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 07:49 PM

A card game.

Trons · #12 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bonchkid

A card game.

I was actually using that word for lack of a better one, however if they can call bowling a sport, then why not poker...and if it's on the ESPN, what do other people see it as?

Trons

bonchkid · #13 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 08:00 PM

Because bowling takes physical skill. If you want to have this arguement start a thread about it.

Holis · #14 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 08:51 PM

hmm where was that post that we were discussing raymer vs chris moneymaker ?

busturbubble1 · #15 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 11:37 PM

Harrington and Williams GETTING BUSTED OUT of this years tournament, but realizing they actually had 1 chip left and then making it to the final table would be the biggest accomplishment... ever

Beavis68 · #16 (**permalink**) 07-13-2005, 08:41 AM

As long as we are disucssing impossibilities, what if Phil Hellmuth won it make 2 Championships and 10 bracelets to tie with Doyle and Chan.

Or if Stu Ungar rockpoker resurected and won a 4th! Now that would really be something.

nu2mdwst2 · #17 (**permalink**) 07-13-2005, 12:38 PM

if competitive eating can be a sport, so can poker. (anybody see that shit on ESPN? LMAO)

And Steve-o, i disagree with what you said about if harrington doesnt win any of them it doesnt mean as much. In the WSOP, I think getting to the final table is what counts, and really boosts you up as an elite player if you do it multiple times. To win, you need to get lucky. You need to play well, but you also need to get lucky. Personally, I put Harrington's 2 straight final tables as more of an accomplishment as Moneymaker or Varkonyi winning it. Both of those players I don't feel are as good as most of the other players that made it to their respective final tables, but they caught the cards they needed to win on that day, and thats why they won.

Steve-O · #18 (**permalink**) 07-13-2005, 01:35 PM

Ask a normal person on the street who Chris Moneymaker is and then ask who Dan Harrington is. This will highlight my point.

Maybe to a small group of serious players 2 straight final tables is meaningful but to the general poker population it means nothing.

Also Raymer could make it this year which would make Harringtons accomplishment insignificant. But as a serious player I know that Harrington is much better but it doesn't make his accomplishment any more significant.

Av8tor009 · #19 (**permalink**) 07-13-2005, 02:15 PM

Chris Moneymaker is not a good poker player... he was just lucky... Raymer is going to repeat this year.. he has showed that he has the skill to make it to back-to-back final tables with monster fields, overshadowing Harrington's achievement

Beavis68 · #20 (**permalink**) 07-13-2005, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-O

Ask a normal person on the street who Chris Moneymaker is and then ask who Dan Harrington is. This will highlight my point.

Maybe to a small group of serious players 2 straight final tables is meaningful but to the general poker population it means nothing.

Also Raymer could make it this year which would make Harringtons accomplishment insignificant. But as a serious player I know that Harrington is much better but it doesn't make his accomplishment any more significant.

Accomplishment is only judge by publice recognition?