POKER INFO - PROILE - Chris Moneymaker

When CM won the WSOP, he played a couple of days later a 200$ buy in on sunday at PokerStars. I noticed that i had make a note on his picture "money800". I made this note before he played the wsop ..And you know what my note was : you guess i will posted it in a couple of days

Call it what you want, but Chris is laughing the whole way to the bank. He played very well. In poker you need to have the skill and make the right calls to get in an oppertunity to get a little lucky. And you do need some lucky catches to win a tournament of that size. He made some great calls to put himself in position to catch some luck. Alot of players would not have made some of the great plays he did to put himself in a position to get some luck and win the whole thing! Good Job Chris and I hope you do well next year!

CM called A2s because A; HE had a stack. B. He Knew guys were getting aggressive substandard. HE was right, plain and siple. Just like when people say he got lucky and was dumb vs BOyd w/ the 33 hand. HE CALLED FOR LOW CARDS B4 BOYD EVEN SHOWED! If you dont understand this level of play, don't talk crap to someone who does. From your commentary, it's obvious i've FORGOTTEN more about tourney poker than you'll ever know, and make more in a average day of poker than you do in a year, thus SMALLSTAKES SAMMY! His play at the final table was as solid as anyones, and any PRO (emphasis obviously necessary) would understand that. AMir Vahdei is one of the best players in the world in tourneys, yet hwe looked like a idiot. ANy comments on him; of course not. High level poker at times looks bad. CM played solid aggressive poker, and was rewarded. Stick to the small stakes.

My Dead grandmother Knew he was up against overcards at minimum..... He was a slight favorite or a huge dog...Thanks for pointing out another mistake he made...If you call with threes in this situation you have no clue... How many tournaments have you won, you moron? Keep praising your idol and maybe some day you'll get blown out with small pairs against huge raises....THIS OBSERVATION BY YOU EXPOSES YOU AS A TOTAL FRAUD.. VAHEDI MADE THE AGGRESSIVE MOVE, HE DIDN'T CALL IT.. CALLING WITH BAD HANDS IS WAY WORSE THAN BLUFFING WITH THEM.......YES POCKET THREES ARE A HORRIBLE CALL, POKER 101.......

Uhh...What? His call was on the F-L-O-P, Dutch only had two more cards to outdraw him. I actually think the percentile meter said MM was about a 70% favorite. So it was a great call. In that situation the only potential bad factor is that is it for ALL his chips...but again, he is a big favorite. It's the equivalent of him calling with AK over A10 or something. Yes, if MM called and Dutch had A9, heck yes it would be a bad call, but the word IF is huge here. How can you honestly say it's THAT bad of a call? He basically won the tournament because of it, he was playing to win--he knew he needed the big stack to do so. I just think you REALLY REALLY hate MM.

Nevermind,stop looking at tv percentages and think .....

Funny, your dead grandmother was WRONG, just like you. Must be genetic. And vahedi CALLED preflop twice with absolute trash, which BOTH chipped away at his huge stack.As someone else staed, the 33 play was on the flop, and he KNEW BOyd was on a play. by the way, I've won about 35k in tournaments the last year, and i dont even play them that much. Keep playing those low limit games, and if you ever wanna step up, come find me playing 200+15 10 person sit n go's on party 4 at a time, 150 tourneys a week......

People who think he's an absolute hack obviously know nothing about Tournament Poker at that level. I had the unfortunate experience of being busted by this guy last week at the Bay 101. Believe me he is for real. Impossible to read, and very difficult to bluff. He called me down with an underpair with 2 overcards on the board (which I missed). I can't think of too many pros that would have had the guts to make that play. In the WSOP, I think he made 1 mistake, calling Tomer's all in. To be honest, it wasn't that bad of a call. Chris had Tomer outchipped 4/1 and those of us who have played with Tomer know he could have made the bet with nothing. The play against Humberto was not a bad play. He did not "call" with pocket 8's. He raised, and for those of you who don't understand poker, this is called a bluff, or semibluff if you will. Running into pocket Aces can make anyone look foolish. Humberto put in a modest preflop raise so Chris did not suspect Aces. Humberto had lost a decent portion of his stack to Chris in the past several hands and I really think Chris thought Humberto was tilting, therefore trying to make a play at him. Humberto missplayed his hand. Instead of winning the pot, he was looking to double up. Slowplaying will kill you in high $$$ NL games, especially against the big stack. Look at the Lederer vs. Moneymaker in their AA vs. AK hand, flop came Kxx, Howard led and Moneymaker committed all his chips to the pot, forcing Howard to fold. That's the way it's supposed to be done in NL. When you have the best hand, you make it impossible for your opponent to draw. This is difficult for internet players to understand, because the play is vastly different. For the record, Chris NEVER put his tournament at risk with the worst hand after day 2. Chris had Humberto outchipped 4/1, Ivey 4/1, and Benvenisti 4/1. The read against Dutch Boyd was great, but I don't know if I'd have the stones to make that play.And don't confuse limit games with NL tourneys, that's like comparing the NFL to Australian Rules football. They are two different games completely. Just because you aren't great at Limit (and I'm not judging his limit play, I've never witnessed it), doesn't mean you are a poor No Limit Tourney player.BTW, he finished 2nd at the Bay 101, which will be televised on the Travel Channel in June. So if we combine WPT and WSOP events, he's had a better showing in the last year than most pros in the game. This guy is for real!

I do not know if SSS is him, or if by nevermind, quit looking at TV percentages he thought I was wrong he can go to cardplayer--the poker calculator and see that MM was a substantial favorite at 70%! Would you call with a 70% to become the chip leader and almost ensure a spot at the final table? Yep, the calculator also shows that AK has a 72% chance of winning over A5...Put yourself in both situations, in both situations you have a great chance to win the pot. Would you put all of your chips in, with this lead and try and WIN this tourny! You are already in the money--I'm pretty sure. It was a great call man.

sounds like a lot of sour grapes here..don't forget that he bluffed Farha heads-up with NOTHING....with the tournament on the line...That takes cojones...luck is a great thing to have...I always say "the harder I work, the luckier I get"..Nice job Chris.

pokerdali it was a 70k call

congrats to moneymaker for his intimidation. it will be interesting to see how he plays in the first day and hopefully he will get past it unlike varkonyi

the reason he won was due to his ability of not letting players such as howard lederer read him. when you take that ability he becomes there equal heads up.

stop getting down on moneymaker, he won the wsp2003 on skill he got lucky on that one hand against brenes besides that it was all skill. against ivey why wouldnt he call his all in with three queens and an ace kicker? and against farha he made some real gutsy moves and it paid off.

Seeking opinion: On the bluff to Farha (busted flush draw versus Vahedi's top pair), afterwards they got talking and Vahedi claimed he folded Queens, and MM said something like "but the highest card was a ten...oh, you had them in your hand? Wow!" I thought this was brilliant acting on his part (someone wrote that he "couldn't remember" above), playing the role of dumb lucky amateur with aplomb to mess with Vahedi. What do others think?

Yes He did play well, he did get lucky but i think the thing that really made him was how the real pros were gunning for him. They wanted to bully him but he stood up against them and did it well thats how he won. As far for making it to the final table again this year. I dont think he will do but GOOD LUCK ANYWAY.

At least Varkhoni didnt win again...

lucky all the way through

johhny chan sucks and chris moneymaker kicks ass!!!

cris oh chris see you out in the first round this year ahhhh sooooooooo

i hate moneymaker.he gets so lucky .the guy got everything and was the luckiest player in the tournament .i mean the bastard took out Johnny Chan

lucky but cool, if i was on the final table at wsop i doubt if i could play that agressive and stay cool!!

There is only one way of measuringsucess in poker$$$

pure $%^*house luck, don't care for the way he plays and whats worse is how he looks and acts. look at his dad

The most controversial poker player in history. Personally, I think he's lucky, but still can hold his own. One does not master poker online.

Mark my words...he won't crack top 200 in this years main event. Good guy though, but his play won't stand the test of time.

Who cares... he's a millionaire now. If he quit today and just lived the rest of his life he'd still have my respect. He looks like the kind of guy who'll actually hang on to his millions...

Obviously Dumb Luck prevailed the last 2 years at the WSOP. Hopefully that all changes this year. And for those of you amatures out there who think that MoneyMaker won the tournament because he made all the right calls or because he played well, I hope to see you guys this year at the WSOP.

ukgekko, too bad i'm pretty sure he is a gambling addict and probably already pissed away all the money from the wsop on the ponies.

considering the actual time length of the main event and the amount of time that you morons got to watch on ESPN, do you think that you might have missed a few hands? lets see.... 7 hours on ESPN vs. about 40-50 hours of live play. i think you all missed something here. no one could get a read on him, and when someone tried to put a move on him, he recognized it and took down the pot. Luck? I don't think so. Even the regular tournament pros have said that he played very well all the way to the end. why wouldn't he have made the call against ivey? could any of you lay down those queens knowing for sure that you had the best hand at the time? NO! back to the original comments, of course ESPN is going to show the hand against brenes, he hit a two outer, however, he had just taken several hands from brenes and wanted to intimidate him. after they show this hand, all of you can sit here and say that he got sooooooooo lucky. it is called ratings! now all of you and every other amateur with a bankroll of $10,000 think you can go win. now, instead of just getting the same or slightly better ratings, everyone in the country watches to see if another one of their amateur heroes can win it all again! it is just like what any other tv station does with shows, edits them to project the picture they want to portray. in this case, ESPN showed 1, 2 at best, lucky hands that MM played. it is not a lottery people, but if you ever win a tournament without getting lucky or hitting a 2-3 outer, then you must by some psychic power know exactly what cards are coming every hand. have any of you ever gotten into a pot with 99, played it out, and had your opponent turn over AK? who got lucky here? did you make a good read and call his bluff the whole way with 2nd pair, or did he get unlucky not hitting an A or a K? well, the truth is you probably got scared when a Q hit the board on the flop and figured that he hit it perfectly. do any of you "MM sucks people" even know what the odds of making a pair on the flop are? good grief, i am sure that because you have all read super system, all of a sudden you think you know how to play like doyle. well, guess what, you don't. and as for the guy that posted saying that MM knocked him out at bay 101, good for you for showing some good sportsmanship to all of these whiny babies who can't win an online multi table event, much less a WSOP main event.