Is it less impressive when rich guys win a big tournament?

[HPG ADMIN]

Last year Phil Gordon made a name for himself on the WPT after doing well in a couple of tournies. It is well-known now that he is super-rich after selling his company for $90 million or so. Some players refuse to give him credit for being a great player because the money doesn't mean anything to him. This attitude of not giving credit to tourney winners who were previously rich have been magnified now that Ben Affleck has won a big tournament. They argue that they can play with no fear knowing their income wont be affected at all - no matter what their loss is. But other players are quick to retort to the critics with the usual "How many big tournies have you won?" comeback. What do you think about this?

[nutem]

It is impressive to win any tourney, you have to be good, but it is less impressive for someone with that much money. It has to be easier for someone with no money concerns.

[Curmudgeon]

3Times New Roman7

I think most of us play for ego as much as money. Once we get "in-the-money," I think ego plays the biggest part in motivating us. Of course, the money counts, but whether rich or poor, I think the winner has done something impressive.

Cheers: Curmudgeon

Rich people are basically playing for only entertainment and recognition. Therefore it doesn't really hurt them to lose. In conclusion, screw rich people.

I believe they do have skill and experience but it's all based off money. I'm sure they have professional tutors and play every high end tournament possible. it wont change much in there lives except for bragging rights.

it could also be said that it is more difficult for rich people to win because they play a loser game, if the money doesn't matter.

any win is impressive rich or poor.

Still wait for my first in any game above 10 people.