2026 World Series of Poker May 26th - July 15th
Gold was extremely entertaining and he definitely played his incredible rush well & provoked people into making mistakes against him.
And with his father in late stage ALS, you had to be happy for him.
ICM was definitely a thing in 2006. Wasicka thinking if I fold there's a good chance I just make 2million more versus risking everything on a draw to double and still be far behind in 2nd is ICM. Jamie Gold knowing this and applying pressure is ICM. I know Harrington on Holdem Volume 2 heavily talks about this concept whether or not the actual term "ICM" is used in the book I c
Yeah this. ICM wasnt a thing? ICM has been a thing since the dawn of tournament poker. Wascika knew if he called Binger would most likely fold and most likely would be 50/50 at best. Is it worth it to lose a couple million?
If I ever made final table, I don't think I'd really consider ICM all that much, because the value of getting 1st place in the Main Event is priceless and you get to go down in poker history as a champion. That is really great for your legacy which you can't really put a price tag on. Also, winning first place could open a lot of doors that could be worth even more than the 10 million especially if you know how to leverage that opportunity correctly.
As far as talking at the tables during hands. This didn't seem to be a rule that was really enforced at any of the tables I was at. I suppose if the table talk is really blatant with the intention of laddering up or teaming up against a short stack that is already all-in I could see that as a problem. Stuff like "I have a really weak hand, but I feel like calling you" or "You have anything good? You look a little nervous." I feel like these kind of things add some fun to the game. Table talk rules seems to be loosely enforced which I think is probably the correct way to go about it.
If I ever made final table, I don't think I'd really consider ICM all that much, because the value of getting 1st place in the Main Event is priceless and you get to go down in poker history as a champion. That is really great for your legacy which you can't really put a price tag on.
This was true 15-20 years ago I doubt it's very true today. I can't even remember most winners in the last 10 years besides Michael Mizrachi.
I mean say you were 4th in chips with 15 bigs and 8 players left, the next stack has 40 bigs but the 4 stacks below you all had 2-3 bigs the ICM implications are huge and pretty hard to ignore unless you're filthy rich already.
This was true 15-20 years ago I doubt it's very true today. I can't even remember most winners in the last 10 years besides Michael Mizrachi.
Having it back on espn might slightly help but yeah it was just a door or two maybe for some cash game on pokergo in recent times. It doesn't have the outreach anymore. Ensan has two deep runs in seven main events and it's not like he's going to all of a sudden pop up on every poker show.
Agree on the 2 above posts, I don't think there is a significant amount of extra money available if you win the main as an unknown. I think Mizrachi is now sponsored by GG, but he was a known entity prior to winning. I don't think Tomayo/Weinman for example would have had options for lucrative deals.
Borg23's example is on point. I don't think winning the main opens up millions in sponsorship or other opportunities and should not affect normal ICM decisions.
The bracelet is worth some, especially in the main. Like you'd get eleven instead of ten million, big deal. ICM in the right place could give you two instead of just one. That means something.
Of course, your name could reach a degree of immortality if winning. But you can get your name somewhere else for cheaper.
As far as talking at the tables during hands. This didn't seem to be a rule that was really enforced at any of the tables I was at. I suppose if the table talk is really blatant with the intention of laddering up or teaming up against a short stack that is already all-in I could see that as a problem. Stuff like "I have a really weak hand, but I feel like calling you" or "You h
The rule, as it was explained to me at this year's WSOP, is limited to talking about your own hand. Of course, there's other rules that limit what you can say, i.e. rules against collusion. So, you also can't ask another player if they want to check it down when someone is all in, for example.
But the table talk rule allows you to ask your opponent, "Do you have an ace?" But your opponent is not allowed to respond, which is kind of awkward and silly.
The rule, as it was explained to me at this year's WSOP, is limited to talking about your own hand. Of course, there's other rules that limit what you can say, i.e. rules against collusion. So, you also can't ask another player if they want to check it down when someone is all in, for example. But the table talk rule allows you to ask your opponent, "Do you have an ace?" But yo
Matusow got a 1 round penalty for exposing a card heads up on the river on day 2 of the main.
Yeah, a bit different because it's actually exposing a card, but my understanding of the rules is that Matusow would've gotten the same penalty if he just said what one of his cards was. Kind of ridiculous that a purported professional doesn't know better. But this also shows how the rules enable someone to angle a less-informed player. Not that this guy was trying to angle Matusow, but you could see someone asking, "Do you have an ace?" and then the person responding is the one on the hook?
