You Can Bet On It

Mike Caro is a good friend and an esteemed colleague of mine. He is fondly known as the "Mad Genius," and has proclaimed himself to be the "world's foremost oddsmaker." After reading Caro's column in the June 8, 2001, issue of Card Player, "The Best Players in the World are Probably Not Who You Think," I couldn't help but think about the name of Larry Grossman's radio talk show, You Can Bet On It.

In his column, Caro said that with a field of 613 players, there's not one single player whom you should rate better than 200-1 against winning the World Series of Poker main event. I respectfully (and totally) disagree with this statement. I'm not a mathematician. I do, however, consider myself to be a pokeratician (I like that word – pokeratician). I believe there are several players who are better than 200-1 to win the championship event at the WSOP.

The main event at the WSOP is five days long. This is a lot of time to play. I happen to think the top players are 10 times more likely to win this event than the average guy. The players at the top are there because they move their chips and know how to win. At 200-1, there appears to be great value to me in Phil Hellmuth, Erik Seidel, T.J. Cloutier, Johnny Chan, Huck Seed, David "Devilfish" Ulliott, Tony Ma, Daniel Negreanu, Scotty Nguyen, Men "The Master" Nguyen, and David Chiu.

According to Caro's odds, you could take the top 10 or 11 players, and they would not be favored to win this event in the next 20 years! You could also take 40-50 players and get decent odds against any of them winning in a given year. Mike, since "no one" is 200-1 or better, could a guy get 5-1 on a bet if he picks 40 players? After all, the "true odds" are better than 14-1. Are you listening, Mike?

In his column, Caro claimed that "luck" plays a large role in the success of the top tournament players. I don't believe "luck" is the reason for their success (although no one would argue that it doesn't help). He also mentioned that Phil Hellmuth and I are two of the top tournament players (thank you, Mike), and that "luck" has most likely been the reason for the difference in our recent results. As much as I would like to think Hellmuth has done better because he is luckier than I am, I don't buy it. His seven bracelets to my one can't be (and do not deserve to be) attributed to "luck."

It's OK to disagree. Amongst gamblers, two guys who disagree should equal a bet. One thing I love about Amarillo Slim is that he profoundly states, "If I talk about it, I'll bet on it." And he will. I hope Mr. Caro shares that sentiment. Take care.