...af Andy Beal.
Men hvis Michael Craigs seneste teaser holder vand, så ser det ud til at der sker en udvikling i "the corp":
Sakset fra Bluff Forum.
(bemærk, Craig har nu passeret deadline på sin April Issue artikkel til Bluff Mag).
My apologies for being so vague. I have to talk with a few people before I can disclose much more, but Andy is back in Las Vegas. Discussions to resume the game started while he was still standing at the table on Wednesday afternoon after winning the group"s last $3.8 million from Ted Forrest.
It"s not easy physically putting together the bankroll, and the situation was complicated enormously by most of the players being in L.A. for the Commerce WPT Final. For an instant, it looked like Andy was going to follow the last few players out of town and resume the game on Thursday or Friday at the Commerce.
The details of who said they were going to put a bankroll together, why Beal stuck around the Wynn Wed. afternoon, and why he eventually left town may be in the article I"m finishing right this minute, so I"ll either disclose them later or in the April issue. But Andy believed based on what he heard that day that they would have a bankroll together (a) later that day, or (b) in a few days. The uncertainty was because it was unclear whether he was suddenly dealing with ONE or TWO groups.
He returned on Friday, on the simple belief that if they were getting their money together and he wanted to play, he wanted to be at the Wynn when it happened.
More later, after I talk with the people I need to talk with - and hit my deadline for the April issue.
Michael Craig
P.S. - Did anyone ever explain why the match is going forward at the Wynn?
----
Der ser altså ikke ud til at være helt enighed på "Pro"-siden om hvordan spillet skal fortsætte. Om det er folk der falder fra, eller nye der vil ind kan man jo kun gætte på - men i mine ører lyder det som om, at man ikke er lige tilfreds med alles spil, og således ikke gider smide sine millioner i et consortium hvor Doyle peger spillere ud. Men at man åbenbart stadig mener at de skarpeste har en edge på Beal.
Synes det lyder spændende!
Vi har ikke set det sidste....
I får lige udvalgte indlæg fra Bluff - har ikke lige tid til at kommentere på dem, eller krydsreferere med andre fora lige nu....
-----
Andy Beal told me that the match will continue at the Wynn on Tuesday at noon. They expect to be playing $30,000-$60,000.
Would Phil Ivey be an interesting match for Andy Beal in the opening session?
Michael Craig
Two groups: Different players talked with Beal immediately after the Wednesday match. It was unclear whether they were both speaking for the group that had bankrolled the Feb. 12-15 matches. It"s possible one of the players was contemplating raising money from other sources. He promised to get back to Beal by 5 PM and put the likelihood of raising the money at over 70%. He never called Andy and hasn"t been heard from (by Beal) since.
The Wynn: Andy Beal loves the Wynn and, frankly, sitting at a desk there while typing this, I have to agree with him. It would be accurate to say that he liked the poker room and the staff at the Bellagio but had some disagreements with the casino. These were run-of-the-mill (my interpretation) disputes between customers and casinos and Andy, a diligent customer, decided to vote with his feet.
It was the Bellagio"s loss, and unfortunate for their poker room which, as I said in SUICIDE KING, is America"s home field for poker. But Deborah Giardina, the Wynn"s director of poker room operations, and her staff have done a great job. They have given extra attention to THE GAME, though not necessarily to Andy. There are certain security and regulatory safeguards but otherwise, Beal is just another customer. I don"t know what deal he has now, but when he first made his reservations, he got the same poker rate as anyone who asks for it and plays 6 hours a day.
Michael Craig
.....
Ivey vs. Beal should be a great match. Andy skill, training, and preparation are unconventional and have proven successful. Ivey is regarded as the best poker player in the world, and that may be accurate. But ....
1. It doesn"t appear anyone has been holding Ivey back. Somehow, he hasn"t been one of the $100,000-$200,000 players against Beal in the 2004 games. He did play Andy for two days at $30,000-$60,000 back in May 2004 and they broke even. (Ivey may have come out ahead by one or two bets.) And he didn"t play in the $50,000-$100,000 games of Feb. 1-5 and Feb. 12-15. He came by the room a few times. I heard several people who had shares in the group say they thought he was going to play. But he never played.
2. As I said, they have played for 2 days. Ivey didn"t seem to get any read on Beal then, and Andy is probably a better player now.
3. Throw out preconceived notions. "Ivey is super aggressive." "Beal plays only heads-up." Ivey obviously can play every time of game, every type of circumstance. But Andy Beal only plays this game and this circumstance. The universe of things he has to adapt to is smaller, and he has trained himself to adapt to them. Ivey could be better than Todd Brunson, Jennifer Harman, and Ted Forrest, but can you say that their play was somehow deficient, or they exposed some kind of weakness, that couldn"t be present in Ivey"s play?
4. Don"t overestimate the value of being on a team. Some of these people don"t communicate well with each other. A lot of poker success at these levels depends on things you can"t really communicate. It"s not as if Todd can tell Phil, "When Andy puts his hand on his chin, he"s bluffing." If Beal is giving off signals, it is not something for which you can write an instruction manual. If it was, Jennifer Harman wouldn"t have lost $5 million after winning $1 million the first time.
It will be an interesting match, and hopefully a memorable one. But I"d love to get a bet down on Beal at the kind of odds implied by what many people are saying on the Internet. I"d be surprised if even the pros think Andy is more than a slight underdog.
Michael Craig
Michael, three more questions:
1) Is Beal good at changing gears in terms of his aggressiveness?
2) Also, why did they lower the stakes?
3) Is Lederer still part of the group in terms of financial investment, and is there any chance he will play?
---
Three more answers:
1. Yes, if he doesn"t play too long. If he plays too long, he loses his sharpness. It"s a great camouflage if he gets great cards, because the pros pound him with aggressiveness. But it"s a dangerous way to play.
2. Several reasons: (a) he wants them higher so they"ll have something extra to think about, or so they can get wiped out in the swings, or to focus on a shorter match - taking it to the extreme, if they had $10 million and played $1,000-$2,000 he would have trouble playing an optimal game in the long, long game that would require. In a 100-bet game, they are courting danger and ability to stay on task is easier; (b) he"s the outsider so he gets his way, but they are losing, so they get their way.
3. Howard was part of the group in the first two go-rounds. I"m pretty sure he is still part of the group, but I have not spoken with him about it. As far as him playing, if he is part of the group, he could play. This is where coming up with a precise answer, however, is dicey. I"m not privy to everything. The situation is fluid. Some things I know I can"t disclose. So how"s that for a definite maybe?
Michael Craig