Originally Posted by redietz View Post
Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
In the poker world there is some distinction between tournament players and cash game players. The guys at the very pinnacle of the cash game world always make more than tournament players. I don't follow so much but it used to be believed that one's EV (ooooh look at what I did) on a tournament is not higher than a buyin. I have no idea as it is very dependent on many things but the idea is that there just isn't that much money in tournaments. Especially given tax implications.

However the cool thing about these tournaments is that people can go around saying they've won $50 million playing poker! Ha! These people are clearly more successful than I ever was but the whole thing is a bit of a joke in some ways. What do these records really tell us without the buyins? What would they tell us if we had the buyins included? Well whatever ! Who cares! The records are there!

The other thing is Redietz keeps making fun of the guy who bet 2000 as if the guy was saying "Hey look at me make this $2k bet". The whole point of that video was to show people get limited which Redietz denied. Redietz seemed to ignore that aspect and then fixated on the amount of the bet. He then uses it to ridicule the person who has clearly been limited by a book. I hate to admit it but I am SO confused right now.

How does redietz see the world? If you ridicule someone for making a $2000 bet then what is the buyin for these contests he references? $10k minimum I would think.

Ahh well a few of many questions I have. It would be nice to see Redietz give his thoughts but as I've noticed he seems to be a bit too busy respond when the answers are desired the most. I'm sure when we hear him on GWAE here soon things will be clarified.

I'm not ridiculing someone for making a 2K bet. I'm ridiculing the idea of people assigning gravitas or expertise or experience to someone BECAUSE they are making 2K bets. Or because they are "limited."

Account, if you bothered to read what I posted, I said I tried to bet a $250 future at Hard Rock and was limited to $10. So, by your reasoning, I must (1) be making fun of myself because I admit to making a $250 wager and (2) I must also be a helluva bettor, striking fear into the hearts of mortal books.

No, that wasn't the case. They didn't know me from Adam. The reality was books limit people all the time for myriad reasons. If you don't understand that, you should just stand on the sidelines.
I will stand on the sidelines as I don't even bet sports outside of recently doing promo stuff for friends of a friend type deal.

If you were limited to $10 on a bet where they didn't know you - then no my reasoning would not be that they limited you. You stated as much.

The fact that you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away. This is like an episode of Quantum Leap.

So when will we know when you're going to be on GWAE?

Maybe you didn't mock the guy for making a 2k bet but I don't think anyone here is assigning him "gravitas" because he is making the 2k bet either. You're the only one fixating on the 2k aspect of it.