Anunț

**sever** · 03.02.2006, 15:56

Aici se joaca... E in capat masa... nu prea se vede.

Adam Boston, MA: Any insights on the big match going on right now with Andy Beal? Why isn't your brother (Howard Lederer) in the corporation this time?

Annie Duke: (5:22 PM ET ) I assume my brother will play. There are a bunch of players that are going to play him, Todd Brunson, Ivey, Harmon, etc. I'm pretty sure the first day, Andy won. It's an interesting thing because
people look at that and say that Andy has lost a lot to them. Interestingly enough, it's probably not as true as people think it is. Andy has spent a lot of years learning the game. He's improving and obviously he's a smart guy.
It's the nature of limit holdem heads up and there is a lot of variance heads up. They are playing 50/100K with $10 mil bankrolls. Anyone who has played that knows that you can have 100 big bet swings at any time. The results will
be very interesting. If it were a situation where it were a $10 mil bankroll with blinds at 25/50K, then I would be more likely to declare that the group would not lose. But this situations makes it much tougher for the group.

Daniel Negreanu:
"I was asked to be a part of the Corporation, but declined. I'm just not very comfortable risking large sums of money on things that I don't have personal control over.
I'd be comfortable with certain players playing Andy, but there are other specific players whom I think play heads up limit hold'em terribly and Andy might be better fundamentally."

A. Beal va ofera 100 000$ daca rezolvati chestiunea:

Beal's conjecture: if xm + yn = zr, where m, n, r, x, y and z are positive integers with m, n, r > 2, then x, y and z
must have a common prime factor.

For example, the solution 33 + 63 = 35 has bases with a common factor of 3, and the solution 76 + 77 = 983 has bases
with a common factor of 7. As of 2005, there are no known counterexamples.

A reward of $100,000 is offered for a proof or disproof of the conjecture.

**sever** · 03.02.2006, 16:09

Extrase dintr-un interviu (poker news daily) cu Michael Craig, autorul cartii "The Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King: Inside the Richest Poker Game of All Time".

The book concentrates primarily on Andy and his quest to beat the world's best at their own game. Through very very hard work, (writing computer simulations, practicing day and night, etc...) Andy evolves from a relative poker "newbie" to a real threat in just a few months, and the pro's start to get worried. Just one good session for Andy and the professionals will be busted. One of the most interesting facets of Andy's play is the use of his modified watch and chips to randomize his game and predict when his best bluff opportunities might occur. Additionally, Andy negotiates to get the limits pushed higher and higher over the matches.

The picture that I really would’ve wanted to use was the picture I described [in the book]: Andy Beal with all their money, then Jennifer Harman, then Doyle Brunson, then Ted Forrest…Ted actually has a fairly placid expression. Jennifer and Doyle are really struggling to smile, which was understandable under the circumstances. They had both told me…what a difficult time it was and while they didn’t feel like Andy was rubbing it in or showing them up, the point was that…they were not in at all a joyful mood over that. I mean, they had to borrow money to be able to play him one more time. While they had non-poker assets, it’s just a real uncomfortable situation.

PND: Has anyone shown interest in making the book into a movie? Who could you picture playing Andy Beal? The players?

Michael Craig: There have been a couple inquiries, nothing real serious. I expect that somebody will come forward on it, but it’s not something that I’ve actively marketed.

James Woods loves the book and he would be perfect for Andy Beal. One of the things that I think makes it difficult to imagine as a movie is that it’s an ensemble piece.

I think George Clooney would be great for Andy Beal, except George Clooney is not going to want to be in a movie or some producer is not going to want to pay him his fee where they’ve got four other people they’ve got to pay the same amount of money. His role isn’t a bigger, more important role than four other people, and if he’s going to be Andy Beal, you can’t have some nobody be Doyle Brunson or have a nobody be Howard Lederer, Barry Greenstein, or Jennifer Harman.

For Doyle Brunson: Jack Nicholson. Mark my words, Jack Nicholson IS Doyle Brunson.

James Woods told me that the ideal person to play Ted Forrest would be Ted Forrest. I also heard a rumor that Cameron Diaz had Ellen Degeneres teach her poker so she could play Jennifer Harman.

PND: During the researching and writing of the book, what surprised you the most about the world of professional poker or high-stakes professional poker?

Michael Craig: It may have been a couple things, so if I think about it more, my answer might change some, but when you first mentioned that to me, the first thing that came to mind, and maybe this doesn’t sound like it surprised me, is what gamblers these people are. How they’re willing to play $100,000/$200,000 poker when their regular game is $1,000/$2,000 or $4,000/$8,000. Of course they’re gamblers, but the way I was conditioned to think about the top pros is that they are experts in getting and exploiting their edge.

To me, that's not real gambling. Somebody like Barry Greenstein could get into a game, even a game with the nine worst players in the world, and lose a million dollars. But that's not gambling. A player of caliber says to himself, “I have an edge in skill against these players. If I play long enough with that edge, I will end up winning.” For the players who were the focus of the book, these are risks, but they aren't gambles. That's not the same as a guy who bets on craps or puts money in a slot machine, where he is risking money without ever having the best of it, or having a long-term expectation of a profit once luck evens out.

The thing that I learned, and that was surprising to me and is beginning to make sense, is first that these people all got attracted to poker because it was gambling. It wasn’t like they were one of these guys running a hedge fund and said, “You know, I actually think I could make more money playing high-stakes poker than a hedge fund.” These people all got into poker really young and mostly weren’t good at it right away. Many of them were throwing money at blackjack, throwing money on sports, throwing money on slots, throwing money on whatever, and they were just like crazy gamblers and like millions of other crazy gamblers, poker was one of the craziest things to gamble at, except because of their interest, ability, and skill, they turned it into something that they were good at. But they were still gamblers.

But their gambling was something that wasn’t really gambling to them anymore. It’s risk taking, but it’s not gambling.

It’s not all about them always having an edge. Some very successful gamblers…will get into situations where they don’t have the edge because they’re gamblers and that’s the way they think gamblers need to behave. But if they have an edge the majority of the time, part of the way to get action is to give action.

PND: Regardless of whether or not they were involved in the matches with Beal, who is your favorite poker player?

Michael Craig: Andy Beal.

There’s no single way to answer that. Andy Beal, and his form of poker – high stakes, heads-up, limit hold’em – just has a great approach to the game.

He developed a method to try to master limit hold’em and did extremely well. The difference between you and me and let’s just say, Doyle Brunson, in playing limit hold’em is gigantic. At one time, maybe we could’ve taken Andy Beal, but now Andy Beal has an overall winning record against Doyle Brunson.

Same thing with Chip Reese. Same thing with Barry Greenstein. Same thing with Minh Ly. Here is Andy Beal, a guy five years ago who we might have beat at poker, and he has the skill - in this particular form of poker - to lock horns with the best players in the world, some of the best players ever, and have a real shot of winning.

**sever** · 03.02.2006, 16:23

From The Desk Of Andy Beal

Dallas, Texas
Date: September 2004

To: Doyle Brunson, Chip Reese, Todd Brunson, Jennifer Harman, Howard Lederer, Chau Giang, Barry Greenstein, Ted Forrest, Gus Hansen, Lee Salem, John Hennigan, Ming La, Lyle Berman, Phil Ivey, Johnny Chan, Hamid Dastmalchi

I recently read a story in the New York Daily News that is an unfair mischaracterization of my recent poker experience in the "Big Game" played at Bellagio.

No mention was made that I won more than $10 million in the largest game ever played, $100,000-$200,000 limit hold'em, on May 12 and 13, 2004. No mention was made of the fact that most of the above-mentioned professional players have substantial overall individual net losses after having played many hours against me. I concede that I am a net overall loser in the Bellagio games, although the extent of my losses is often exaggerated and mischaracterized.

These stories have become like fishermen's tales, in which the fish is always getting bigger every time the story is told. I spent four years learning the game from the best. Does it surprise anyone that I was an overall net loser during that period? Now, you want to reduce the stakes and refuse to continue to play at the previous betting limits. Does it surprise anyone that I have little interest in traveling to play in smaller games? My interest has always been the intellectual challenge of competing with the best, in games in which the amount bet is material to the people involved. I have played the best in the largest game ever played, and I won. I had a great time and a wonderful experience, but I have little interest in continuing to play the game, because of the time commitment and travel required to maintain excellence.

Call me naïve (I've been called worse), but I believe that I am the favorite in a heads-up limit high-stakes game against most of you. For the record, I challenge you to put up or shut up about your "professional play." Come to Dallas and play me for four hours a day and I will play until one of us runs out of money or cries uncle. If your play is so great and your wins have been as large as you claim, you should have plenty of bankroll and be jumping at the chance to come and play another $100,000-$200,000 game and win a lot more money. I should add that you can bring your own independent dealers and your own cards, and can play in a different location of your choice every day if you wish. You should provide a slate of any six or more of the above players and I will pick from your slate who plays. Observers should be free to attend in order to record exactly what happens at this game, so it won't turn into another fisherman's story.

My money says you will decline, and that says it all. If you accept, the resulting game will say it all. Either way, I will get to stop reading fishermen's stories.

Andy Beal

P.S. This challenge is for now (starting September 2004), not weeks, months, or years from now.

---
A pierdut totusi in 2004.

**sever** · 04.02.2006, 03:15

Daniel Negreanu

It was about 5:00pm and I decided to head down to Bellagio to play a little poker. I headed over to my mother's house to pick up my brother so he could get out of the house for a while.

When I got there, it was just Eli Elezra, Chip Reese, and Gus Hansen. They were playing $2000-$4000 Hold'em, Omaha H/L, Razz, Stud, Stud H/L, 2-7 triple draw, Omaha, and Stud H/L Regular.

Later the game filled up with the likes of: Ming Ly, Barry Greenstein, Phil Ivey, Doyle Brunson, Ted Forrest, and David Benyamine.

The session wasn't too eventful for me as far as interesting hands go, but I ran pretty well. I was winning right around $100,000 for most of the session and finally finished up ahead $69,000.

The topic of conversation for the evening was pretty consistent. People were discussing Andy Beal's return to Vegas. Who should play, who shouldn't play, how to play him, how not to play him, etc.

Frankly, much of the conversation surprised me. I am not part of the corporation, because I'm just not comfortable putting my money on other people. Especially when I don't know who'd be playing him. Some of the high limit players not only suck at limit hold'em, but have little to no experience playing heads up.

Rather than invest $500,000 in the corporation, I'd much prefer playing Andy for $1,000,000 all by myself. I've been playing a fair amount of heads up limit hold'em recently, and frankly, I just think that I'd be so much more fundamentally sound than he is that he couldn‘t overcome it.

I also feel like I know the correct approach to beating him. I think a guy like Joe Cassidy or Erik123 would make short work of him since they have so much experience playing the game heads up online.

As for some of the others, if they don't practice playing a lot of heads up limit hold'em online they'd start out lacking the necessary feel that you just have to have in order to be at your best.

Having said that, it appears as though the corp. is going with the A-Team, using Todd Brunson and Jennifer Harman for the most part. Ted Forrest makes up the third leg of that group and apparently has had a good amount of success against him.

What I find interesting, is that Andy feels as though raising the stakes may take the corp. out of their comfort zone. What he fails to realize, is that the corp. isn't really playing that high at all. No one is risking more than $500,000 which is less than they would be risking playing $4000-$8000 on their own.

The only pressure the players would face is having to deal with the criticisms from the rest of the group if they were to lose to Andy. There just isn't much incentive for somebody to want to wake up at 9:00am, play a full day, and 1) get paid no more than someone who slept all day if you win, and 2) have to deal with all of the second guessers if you lose.

Personally, if I had a spare $10 million lying around I wouldn't invest it in the corporation. Instead, I'd sit right down and try to bust them both!

Unfortunately, after looking through my couch for some loose change I came up a little short J However, I’m really rooting for the corporation despite the fact that I elected to pass on being a part of it, because it’s great for the high limit poker world if they are able to win a big number.

**sever** · 04.02.2006, 03:22

Andy vs Ted Forest

Ted pe plus 400.000. Corporatia pe minus 1.300.000.

**nowonda** · 04.02.2006, 14:14

ok. I don't have much but what I do have should keep you happy. It wass overheard tonight at the Palm charity poker event that we were correct that ted was winning. Ted went on an absolute heater and erased all of the loss. he then proceeded to put the corporation up in the win column for the first time. our unofficial total is: +2.2 million for the 3 days. the mood of the pros was naturally up beat. Jennifer Harman was seen beaming theoughout the evening...guess what I finally get to head back to the hotel for some much needed rest...ill check the forum for questions in the room...

(...)

okay...in the room. Tired, and worn down. Like i last said. Ted Forrest did play the entire session today, and the corporation is no longer stuck...they are anywhere from 2.2 to 2.3 million in the plus range. That said, Ted Forrest had one hell of a session. If my math is correct Ted about a 4 million dollar session. PLay will continue tomorrow, however i have no details. Ill get there probably around the same time i did today.

P.S. In caz ca cineva vrea sa se inhame la conjectura aia care are premiu de 100000 de para, m, n si r sunt puteri (x^m + y^n = z^r). Just in case...

m

**sever** · 04.02.2006, 14:33

Ted Forrest a jucat toata ziua de ieri si a cistigat aprox 4 mil ~ usd.
Corporatia ajunge astfel pe plus 2.2 - 2.3 mil usd.

**RedStar** · 04.02.2006, 18:58

Postat în original de nowonda

P.S. In caz ca cineva vrea sa se inhame la conjectura aia care are premiu de 100000 de para, m, n si r sunt puteri (x^m + y^n = z^r). Just in case...

m

Credeam ca e XOR... fuck. Aproape terminasem demonstratia, o iau de la capat...

**sever** · 05.02.2006, 09:05

forest a jucat si ieri

T. Forrest a jucat si ieri. A jucat cel mai bine -din Corporatie.

Bluff magazine reporter:
The following info comes to me from our friend and contributor Gary Wise. when I was talking to Barry G, he told me the following. Thought you might find some of this useful: - Beal is not choosing opponents. Todd was the Corporation's choice and they'll continue to choose, though Andy has limited right of refusal. - The primary reason they play him is unlimited earning potential. They don't feel like their edge is broad enough to justify it otherwise. - Beal's shown difficulty in the past walking away with a loss. The longer a session goes, the better for the pros. It's doubtful sessions where Beale starts up will last too long, making comebacks difficult. - He confirmed the $1.6M number. - Early reports were that Andy's game has improved.
----------------------
actually the book did talk about his extra stacks - if you remember, he was trying to concoct some kind of counting method to decide the probability of his opponent folding

What Beal was doing with the chips is using it as an abicus, to measure the likelihood a bet would entice the other person to fold. Todd Brunson figured it out, and used this to his advantage

**sever** · 06.02.2006, 06:39

Todd Brunson vs A Beal

Just spoke with Craig quickly. Things are pretty even early today. On the hand I just posted Andy had top pair and Todd hit trips on the river....
--
Craig just told me they are quitting for the day before the superbowl....
--
according to one of the dealers...todd just flopped 4 queens...and action was very heavy. the final board was QQQ44. todd flipped over Q4 hearts...andy mucked.
---
well folks...the game is done. the 5 day 5Ok 100k game has concluded. Andy told me he was very happy about his play. He won 3 of the 5 days...although came out behind by almost 3 million. while it proved somewhat in conclusive I think we have all learned that Andy Beal is not only a super sucessful business man a true gentleman....but he is a very talented poker player...

----
Andy zice ca a cistigat 3 zile din 5... dar e in pierdere

**sever** · 10.02.2006, 07:10

I'll answer a few questions but some are other peoples business and I don't feel I should comment on them. Many asked how the dealers were tipped. The winner agreed to pay them $100 per half hour down. The time was $100 per hour. In addition although there was no agreement I tipped the floor $3,000 and the cage $750 on behalf of the corp.

Why didn't Howard play? He hasn't played poker at all for a few years now. He runs full tilt and has other business keeping him busy.

Does money run downhill in poker? Yes and no. money generally goes up the pyramid in poker but when players are flush with cash they will be looser in general. More tokes for one. Staking players is another. Maybe the biggest is that when a big player sits in a smaller or medium sized game he may play looser and spread some money around because he/she isn't really concerned about a loss at that level.

Andy brought 20 million to our 10. A loss of a little over 30 bets over five days was almost a push. Although at these levels every bet counts, at least for me. Andy doesn't care about the money, just the competition and the bragging rights. He played very tuff and easily could have won for the trip. Hope this was helpfull. If Andy comes back please root for us. We need all the karma we can get!!!

Todd Brunson

**Darth** · 10.02.2006, 12:02

Fuck me...ma fac dealer de high stakes...castig mai bine decat dak as juca la mese

**sever** · 13.02.2006, 14:54

Aparusera zvonuri ca A. Beal s-ar fi lasat de poker.
Insa acesta a provocat din nou Corporatia zilele acestea, meciurile urmind sa aiba loc in Dallas. Locul nu a fost acceptat si se joaca tot in Vegas, la Wynn.

Mizele au ramas 50,000$ - 100,000$ si starting chips 10,000,000$.

Primul meci : A. Beal vs Jennifer Harman. Rezultat: Andy a cistigat
5 milioane dolari. Printre spectatori au fost Johhny Chan si Doyle Brunson.

[img]http://www.*************.com/thumbs/doyle-brunson_949.jpg[/img]

Azi ar fi jucat Todd Brunson dar se incepe prea devreme si omu doarme mai mult

Asa ca l-a trimis pe tacso...
DOYLE BRUNSON vs A. Beal - next game

damn, this shit is cool

**nowonda** · 13.02.2006, 15:36

Postat în original de admin_holdem

Primul meci : A. Beal vs Jennifer Harman. Rezultat: Andy a cistigat
5 milioane dolari

jenny mama.. ai dat cu bata-n balta, de-ai reusit sa pierzi jumate din bankroll.. were you on tilt honey?

cam descurajant.. si pentru ea, si pentru ceilalti.. vedem ce face taticu lor..

m

A. Beal	52,94%	27 votes
Corporatia	47,06%	24 votes

Anunț

Regulile forumului www.holdem.ro

Andy Beal vs Corporatia - HIGH STAKES POKER

Andy Beal vs Corporatia - HIGH STAKES POKER

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment