Stayed up pretty late last night listening to the audio broadcast of the heads up portion of the World Series of Poker. I was rooting my ass off for Joe Cada, but found myself strangely pulling for Darvin Moon near the end.
There’s an argument about who would be better for poker; Darvin Moon or Joe Cada? Poker’s sorely missed a good ambassador for the game; Joe Hachem was the last real good one. The last few champs haven’t really done much. Perhaps Joe Cada will turn it around? He seemed pretty enthusiastic about the opportunity to represent poker for 2009 as the youngest main event champ.
But what if Darvin Moon won? He’s the “every man” we’ve been rooting for since Chris Moneymaker set off the boom in 2002. He mentioned, though, that he would head straight back home, had no interest in a sponsorship deal, and didn’t want to be poker’s ambassador. Everyone I know said Darvin was a super likable guy, but he’d be awful for poker. Is that true,? It seems like everyone outside of the poker world has been rooting for Darvin to win. Who would set off more shock waves with a win, Moon or Cada? Everyone expects the smart, young online guy to take down the good ol’ boy, but isn’t an upset every now and again a good thing? Wouldn’t Darvin winning send off another round of – “Hey, this guy can do it, why can’t I?” Does Joe Cada winning make poker a little bit more elitist, like – “Man, I have to study a ton to get as good as that guy, it’s not worth it, I’ll just lose money!” Or is it more like a, “Oh man, if I work hard enough, I can be like Joe Cada.”
Who knows!
Woke up today at 2PM, started the day off with a tiny little blueberry yogurt and an oat and honey granola bar. Hitting the gym in about 2 hours or so, grabbing a shake, then hunkering down to start the work day at a very lol time of 6PM or so. I’ll be up until around 5AM at this point. Whoops
No comments:
Post a Comment