Jeff Sarwer.....anyone know this crazy cat?

wow....

JEFF SARWER'S OFFICIAL WEBSITE

Canadian kid born to a fairly nutz father. Was a child chess prodigy until he disappeared once children's aid society tried to take he and his sister away. His dad took off with them. Didn't surface for years after that.

Now he is starting to take on poker. 3 cashes in europe and Shaun Deeb has said that he is quitting poker in part due to how good this guy is.

could be one to watch for sure.
«1

Comments

  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    and Shaun Deeb has said that he is quitting poker in part due to how good this guy is.

    he should get in line with Mike Macdonald for fall registration at Waterloo.. couple lucky cashes doesn't make a poker career.
  • i do realize that by the time i went pro, the sidney crosby's of poker would be impossible to play against
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    he should get in line with Mike Macdonald for fall registration at Waterloo.. couple lucky cashes doesn't make a poker career.

    LOL wat?????
  • jdAA88 wrote: »
    LOL wat?????

    don't believe in poker prodigies, personally. Too much luck factor in poker.
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    don't believe in poker prodigies, personally. Too much luck factor in poker.

    lolzzzzzz
  • Just read an article about him in Poker Pro Canada. Seems like he could become a force in the poker world if he can keep it up.
  • T8urmoney wrote: »
    lolzzzzzz

    my point is,even if your opponent has a one outer on the river, after four days of playing one of these major tourney's, if doesn't matter how gifted you are as a player, eventually they will hit their one outer over so many hands. Luck plays a big part in making the money in these multi-day tournaments. Joe Cada's 2009 Main Event victory is a great example.
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    my point is,even if your opponent has a one outer on the river, after four days of playing one of these major tourney's, if doesn't matter how gifted you are as a player, eventually they will hit their one outer over so many hands. Luck plays a big part in making the money in these multi-day tournaments. Joe Cada's 2009 Main Event victory is a great example.

    Obviously for one tourney, luck is a part of 'winning' (not cashing), but the more tourney's one plays, the role luck plays deteriorates. And trust me, they don't have an article on someone who has played one tourney and won.

    As you were insinuating that Mike McDonald was a one hit wonder....which is obviously reason for lolzzzzz.

    If we play heads up cash for 4 hours a night, 10 straight nights.....I win every session, guess that just makes me lucky?
  • no, but for someone to give up poker because of some 'gifted' player is plain stupid. He seems pretty full of himself anyhow.

    winning heads up is a lot different than winning tournaments against random players.
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    no, but for someone to give up poker because of some 'gifted' player is plain stupid. He seems pretty full of himself anyhow.

    winning heads up is a lot different than winning tournaments against random players.


    Get a copy of Bluff magazine and check out the article. If the article is even half way above board this guy is legit shit. Not sure how much you know about chess, but this guy was playing 30 multi-table on Canada day.....when he was 8! His mind works faster and on levels most people will never be able to comprehend never mind match.

    Very true that 3 cashes does not a poker career make....but --> he never read a book, never had pro coaching so basically taught himself.

    You seem very quick to knock that which you don't understand. I won't guarantee that this Sarwer is the second coming in the form of a poker player but I'm pretty sure if he puts his mind to it he will crush poker as it is currently played. Shaun Deeb knows his shit. (we may never know though as he is being encouraged to take up chess again.....)

    If you were just looking to stir shit up, well done. Good debate is hard to come by these days.

    Oh, and I called him a Canadian kid but he hasn't lived much of his life here at all. not sure if he identifies too strongly with Canada.
  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    Very true that 3 cashes does not a poker career make....but --> he never read a book, never had pro coaching so basically taught himself.

    In the article I read he did mention that he read the Harrington books before playing his first major tournament. Would definitely like to see how he holds up in cash games though.
  • we all teach ourselves.
  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    You seem very quick to knock that which you don't understand.

    trust me when I say I know how the game of poker works. Not looking to stir shit, I just think too many people over glorify a game of chance. Granted there is a larger component of skill than other forms of gambling, but it is fundamently a 'game' and always will remain a game. Unlike chess.
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    trust me when I say I know how the game of poker works. Not looking to stir shit, I just think too many people over glorify a game of chance. Granted there is a larger component of skill than other forms of gambling, but it is fundamently a 'game' and always will remain a game. Unlike chess.

    please stick to floor games
  • I think I know a little of what Jah speaks.... In this case I understand... Because one can "dominate" at chess does not translate to "dominate" at poker... Totally different. Chess is almost pure skill or at least +90% skill. Poker is nothing like that, even an optimistic assessment would rate it no better than 70% skill... Now over the long term and I do stress long term the skillful poker player will win the majority of the cash but just because this guy is winning in the short term does not make him a poker prodigy, in fact I would be pretty comfortable saying there are no poker prodigy's, primarily because of the significant luck component.
    At one time I would have considered myself a pretty good chess player, that did not translate into being a pretty good poker player.. :(
  • compuease wrote: »
    I think I know a little of what Jah speaks.... In this case I understand... Because one can "dominate" at chess does not translate to "dominate" at poker... Totally different. Chess is almost pure skill or at least +90% skill. Poker is nothing like that, even an optimistic assessment would rate it no better than 70% skill... Now over the long term and I do stress long term the skillful poker player will win the majority of the cash but just because this guy is winning in the short term does not make him a poker prodigy, in fact I would be pretty comfortable saying there are no poker prodigy's, primarily because of the significant luck component.
    At one time I would have considered myself a pretty good chess player, that did not translate into being a pretty good poker player.. :(

    more or less what I was trying to convey. People always seem to overlook the simple fact where poker rooms are situated.
  • compuease wrote: »
    I think I know a little of what Jah speaks.... In this case I understand... Because one can "dominate" at chess does not translate to "dominate" at poker... Totally different. Chess is almost pure skill or at least +90% skill. Poker is nothing like that, even an optimistic assessment would rate it no better than 70% skill... Now over the long term and I do stress long term the skillful poker player will win the majority of the cash but just because this guy is winning in the short term does not make him a poker prodigy, in fact I would be pretty comfortable saying there are no poker prodigy's, primarily because of the significant luck component.
    At one time I would have considered myself a pretty good chess player, that did not translate into being a pretty good poker player.. :(

    it can't translate because your fundamental beliefs between the two are different
  • darbday wrote: »
    it can't translate because your fundamental beliefs between the two are different

    Are you really trying to say the two are similar?
  • compuease wrote: »
    Are you really trying to say the two are similar?

    maybe wisdom comes with age... they will get it eventually.....
  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    Get a copy of Bluff magazine and check out the article. If the article is even half way above board this guy is legit shit. Not sure how much you know about chess, but this guy was playing 30 multi-table on Canada day.....when he was 8! His mind works faster and on levels most people will never be able to comprehend never mind match.

    Very true that 3 cashes does not a poker career make....but --> he never read a book, never had pro coaching so basically taught himself.

    You seem very quick to knock that which you don't understand. I won't guarantee that this Sarwer is the second coming in the form of a poker player but I'm pretty sure if he puts his mind to it he will crush poker as it is currently played. Shaun Deeb knows his shit. (we may never know though as he is being encouraged to take up chess again.....)

    If you were just looking to stir shit up, well done. Good debate is hard to come by these days.

    Oh, and I called him a Canadian kid but he hasn't lived much of his life here at all. not sure if he identifies too strongly with Canada.



    Same with me, I started with just studying all the tv poker coverage and I have only read 1 poker book. Then of course I got some free coaching and then came to poker forums,etc etc;)
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    maybe wisdom comes with age... they will get it eventually.....

    +ev plays * increased hours of play = 1 * more and more profit

    the chances of profiting are built into the formula, but the chance of it happening over time increases towards 100%.

    playing good poker assures you the more you play the more you make.
  • darbday wrote: »
    playing good poker assures you the more you play the more you make.
    This I agree with PROVIDED that one always plays good poker. Two problems, it is very very difficult to always play optimally and is ONLY true over a very large number of hours... That number of hours is debatable but is not less than 1000's of hours...
    That's why there are so many "flash" in the pans, here today gone tomorrow... and so many go bust multiple times, I suspect mostly because of their "other" vices...
  • compuease wrote: »
    This I agree with PROVIDED that one always plays good poker. Two problems, it is very very difficult to always play optimally and is ONLY true over a very large number of hours... That number of hours is debatable but is not less than 1000's of hours...
    That's why there are so many "flash" in the pans, here today gone tomorrow... and so many go bust multiple times, I suspect mostly because of their "other" vices...

    glad you agree thought i was crazy. and the more often you play optimally the higher the skill level you are and skill level defines profit. as far as how many hours for what profit i wish i knew.
  • Jah...sigh

    /thread
  • Not sure why I was so animated in my last post. I have no personal equity in whether or not this guy is the shit or not and whether people believe it or not.

    But if this guy sticks with poker......I will revive this thread when he crushes the game.
  • As is always mentioned somewhere in every strat book, poker is a game of incomplete information, whereas chess is a game of complete information. In chess, there is ALWAYS an optimal choice. In poker (here it comes), it depends . . .

    The fact that this guy is a chess Master (read the article in Bluff while I was in Cuba, and cannot remember if he achieved Grand Master status), means he has a very discplined, if odd, way of thinking. This alone would give him a significant advantage at the tables, in terms of monitoring betting patterns, opponent activity (tight/loose, weak/aggro), etc.

    This guy is definitely going to be interesting to watch, though . . .
  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    Now he is starting to take on poker. 3 cashes in europe and Shaun Deeb has said that he is quitting poker in part due to how good this guy is.

    could be one to watch for sure.

    Jeff has read this thread. He has had more than 3 cashes (not that they matter much). If anyone would like to follow his stats, you can view them here:

    Jeffrey William Sarwer: Hendon Mob Poker Database

    IMO: A lot of the skills learned from chess can be put to use in poker. I don't see how anyone could say anything otherwise. Just requires a little thought if you can't see it now.
  • SuitedPair wrote: »
    But if this guy sticks with poker......I will revive this thread when he crushes the game.

    Don't think this guy will 'crush' the game anymore than any other player with the bankroll to play these major tournaments. Too much variance with these large fields. I assume he will be playing a lot of WSOP events.
  • From the Hendon Mob database he's cashed in like 10 events for random amounts, maybe 4-500K. Wonder how much he's spent on entry fees/travel costs, etc. ie what's his ROI? Way too soon to call him crushing.... :)
    Must be hundreds of guys just like him..
  • compuease wrote: »
    From the Hendon Mob database he's cashed in like 10 events for random amounts, maybe 4-500K. Wonder how much he's spent on entry fees/travel costs, etc. ie what's his ROI? Way too soon to call him crushing.... :)
    Must be hundreds of guys just like him..

    the problem with these databases is they only track their cashes, not the tournaments they placed out of the money.

    If Jeff Sarwer is playing in a bunch of the WSOP events, I will take a random player who is also playing in the majority of the WSOP events that my random player earns more in winnings during these tournaments. Say for $50. Any interest?
Sign In or Register to comment.