Just won my way into the Sunday Millions

[CrippsonBlue]

Which is why I said that in my original post that he failed to quote.

It's clear what the best options are here, but considering no one here likely has the proper roll for such a tournament, playing passive on the bubble hardly requires criticism.

 

[paxmaniac]

It's clear what the best options are here, but considering no one here likely has the proper roll for such a tournament, playing passive on the bubble hardly requires criticism.

sante's a big boy, I'm sure he can handle criticism of a hand he posts. Otherwise, why would he post it?

I agree that this is a shove or fold situation (the latter if you are desperate to mincash). Raising 21k pre, and planning to fold unfavourable flops is insane whatever your bankroll.

 

[CrippsonBlue]

Why post the hand? Pretty clear why he did - as is the uselessness in criticising the play here. He isn't playing this hand the same in a cheaper tournament, and as you said he is a big boy, so he doesn't need people telling him how to spend his money.

I don't disagree with it being a fold or shove situation, however if he does opt for the 3bet and will fold to unfavorable flops to ensure a cash, 21k is about right.

 

[sante]

Obviously I bought in for the $215. So I have $200 on the line and even if I did end up all-in and lost the hand I would have won money anyway. I ended up getting to 700 odd and making an extra $150+, so in that particular circumstance it wasn't as terrible as it looked.

Any other time I shove pre/flop etc. I know I played it weak, but I was happy to do it at that stage.

There are plenty of hands there that have me smashed at the flop, turn and even moreso the river, so as played, its a fold on the river regardless of the bubble IMO.

 

[sante]

Would he have called his 88 pre though? Experienced players will exploit the bubble by playing aggressively vs players they perceive as weak. Your failure to shove preflop definitely labels you as likely to fold to a flop shove.

Yeah he would. He was making plenty of calls with those mid-ranged pockets. He knocked me out with 99 when I shoved over the top of him with AK.

 

[Beagle_Charlie]

$5,000,000 Guarunteed next week, 1 Million for first

Havn't played the million in a long time but will definetly play this one, probably take it down too.

Anyone else going to play?

 

[sante]

I'll be playing, hopefully I can satellite my way in. Don't really want to pay $215 with a 30k+ field.

 

[JuddsABlue]

played and busted

never got over 13k, pretty uneventful

 

[sante]

Came about 19,000th. Had 30k couple hours in sitting nicely but cards went dead and my AK couldn't beat 88. When flop came 8 K x.

 

[Beagle_Charlie]

played it and min-cashed. finished about 7000th

 

[sante]

So they ended up chopping it with 9 left. WTF?

 

[JuddsABlue]

So they ended up chopping it with 9 left. WTF?

yeah, complete logisical nightmare but the payouts were so bad they had to

40k for 9th, compared to 1.6mil for 1st

3rd was even 780k which is redic

I think the chop ended up with the major scorer taking home a touch over 800K~ and the smallest cash being $250k~ so I dont think anybody was too upset about it

Plus the lambo for first left great incentive to play

Amazing prizepool though, $11mil is redic for a $200 buyin.

 

[checkraiseulite]

The guy who shipped it was a 17yo Dutch kid and now Stars are refusing to pay out. Now his dad is claiming it was him who was playing.

Full story: http://www.mpcpoker.com/who-won-the-500000-father-or-son/

 

[CrippsonBlue]

He didn't ship it, and ultimately a couple of posts online aren't going to hold much weight should this matter need to go further.

They will get paid.

 

[checkraiseulite]

lol, prob should have read my own article. way too tired and just posted after reading a thread on 2+2.

Anyway, Will be interesting to see whether Stars pay out on this. I don't think it's 100% assured that they will pay.

 

[CrippsonBlue]

Ha, title can come across as a bit misleading.

Certainly wouldn't want to be in their position, and if Stars are adamant about not paying, it'll be hard going up against them.

 

[JuddsABlue]

Ha, title can come across as a bit misleading.

Certainly wouldn't want to be in their position, and if Stars are adamant about not paying, it'll be impossible going up against them.

fyp

If stars say no, thats it, its gone

If he was 17, or at any point he switched to let his dad play or visa versa, then he shouldnt get his money and it should be distributed back to the players. How this would happen I dont know.

Theres also strong rumours about ghosting on the final table (pretty obv if you ask me), so I'm interested to see where that goes

Also note it wasnt the winner whos in doubt, the winner is a decent well known reg.

 

[Ricketts]

What's ghosting?

 

[JuddsABlue]

What's ghosting?

ghosting is having another/usually better player take over your account when you are deep in a tournament

usually you strike a deal with a better player where they 'buy' your account for whatever sum you agree on, they take over and receive whatevery prize money they can win

another form of ghosting is just having a better player stand behind you and tell you what to do, or just give you general advice

player wrzr123 had only played 80 or so tournaments before the SM, had sattied in through a $4 tournament ($215 was his biggest ever cash) and was pointed out as being incredibly fishy by people railing as the field narrowed

then all of a sudden, everything he was doing changed. His bet sizing was what most people talked about, he went from very spazzy/bad to the sizing of a decent reg (2.2x preflop etc) and showed very good poker knowledge in the chatbox and when they were dealing. A player with only 80 games experience with zero final table/deal experience could not have been as aware as he was

It was very blatant imo, and if you have a look at a 2p2 thread on the SM, you can see where it all changes and about 15 different people all have something to say about it as it happens

So it appears wrzr123 had some contact with a decent player and they struck a deal for that player to take over his account

(allegedly)

 

[JuddsABlue]

Boom:

Update: Pokerstars Holland Representative Simon Keijzer tells Dutch TV show Jimmy Jonker is registered as a 19-year old, while he is 17 years old at the moment. Keijzer declares that an under-aged shouldn’t have played the tournament and he will not be entitled to the prize money (March 9, 12.15 GMT).

Taken from 2p2

Note this ISNT wrzr123 who I spoke of in the above post

 

[CrippsonBlue]

If the account was under the sons name, then of course they had no hope in hell of getting paid, even if the father truly did play.

IMO the money he was due to get paid should be equally split between all those he knocked out.

 

[BEEG]

ghosting is having another/usually better player take over your account when you are deep in a tournament

usually you strike a deal with a better player where they 'buy' your account for whatever sum you agree on, they take over and receive whatevery prize money they can win

another form of ghosting is just having a better player stand behind you and tell you what to do, or just give you general advice

player wrzr123 had only played 80 or so tournaments before the SM, had sattied in through a $4 tournament ($215 was his biggest ever cash) and was pointed out as being incredibly fishy by people railing as the field narrowed

then all of a sudden, everything he was doing changed. His bet sizing was what most people talked about, he went from very spazzy/bad to the sizing of a decent reg (2.2x preflop etc) and showed very good poker knowledge in the chatbox and when they were dealing. A player with only 80 games experience with zero final table/deal experience could not have been as aware as he was

It was very blatant imo, and if you have a look at a 2p2 thread on the SM, you can see where it all changes and about 15 different people all have something to say about it as it happens

So it appears wrzr123 had some contact with a decent player and they struck a deal for that player to take over his account

(allegedly)

I can see why ghosting would be against the rules

But what do people expect when playing in the comforts of there own home you cant expect everybody to be decent individual and play fair

Cant see how Poker Stars Full Tilt and the other Poker online sites can complain about this stuff there making alot more then they give out so pretty much just have to deal with it and so do the people playing

With the 17 year old kid i wonder how many tournaments his entered and lost money in are they going to return that because he was under age they should have stricter registration for these kind of things ID/Passport should be submitted they should have to pay him out and learn from the mistake they made

 

[paxmaniac]

If the account was under the sons name, then of course they had no hope in hell of getting paid, even if the father truly did play.

IMO the money he was due to get paid should be equally split between all those he knocked out.

There is plenty of precedent for underage players on Stars. The usual result is that the balance is paid out, and the accounts are suspended until the kid turns 18. James "Andy McLeod" Obst was in this situation a few years ago.

Stars have no reason to withhold the money unless the player actually cheated.

 

[CrippsonBlue]

There is plenty of precedent for underage players on Stars. The usual result is that the balance is paid out, and the accounts are suspended until the kid turns 18. James "Andy McLeod" Obst was in this situation a few years ago.

Stars have no reason to withhold the money unless the player actually cheated.

Really - can't see why this wouldn't happen then if this is the case, and good luck to him.

Though, in regards to cheating, if they claimed the father played under presumably the sons account, that may be cause enough not to pay.

 

[sante]

How does a 17 year old get that far anyway?