[BBP Guru]

It’s hard to imagine a record field, more than $20 million in prize money, and probably the most talented poker field ever assembled don’t even make the headlines when discussing the 2003 World Series of Poker. Nope, none of it is headline material; actually it’s all headline material, but this year the show was flat out stolen by Chris Moneymaker, an unknown and aptly named amateur from Tennessee. Moneymaker emerged from complete obscurity, qualifying on the strength of a $40 online satellite, to win Poker’s most sought after prize, as well as cash winnings of $2.5 million.

Read full article at http://www.blindbetpoker.com/wsop/2003wsop.html

[hayden1009]

well this year another amatuer won again keeping the unknowns ahead of the pros ....this is bringing a new era to poker ....the internet is allowing people ti hone their skills and laying waste to the term dead money

[ryntur11]

Chris winning is a big thing to the little people playing on the internet. it just goes to show that online poker player that play the little tables can win millions if they play right.

[dave1957]

The bad thing about the people coming from the online poker world. Is that they can not do a repeat of it. Like Chris Moneymaker he has been doing just so so with live poker and the old pros are still winn and making there living with poker

[Phoenix29]

Moneymaker was a fluke. No respect at all.

Greg Raymer on the other hand is a more impressive player.

[W13rd0W]

yes..he was lucky lucky lucky to win the main event..Farha is 100% better then him ! some guys just get preety lucky...i like the way that Negreanu plays,Annie Duke,Mike Matusow and Doyle Brunson...I read both Super Systems and he is one of the greatest players all time..Oh and Chris Ferguson plays very very good too .. So this are just 6 players that could easy beat Moneymaker...and i'm sure that are many more others..

Cheers ,
W13rd0W

[mikesizl]

i dont usally critisize people but since his win in 2003 , moneymaker hasnt won an event for two years . What happened ? start getting bad cards every tournament or what ?
but that is just me being dissapointed because i didnt get to go to wsop and he did.

mikesizl

[W13rd0W]

the only answer is that he can't be called a pro player just an average player who got lucky...as i said before i don't have moneymaker in my hall of fame players that should be apreciated...he became arrogant ( i saw him in the 2004 WSOP ) but who wouldn't be if they will win 2.5 milion $ in a week...

Cheers,
W13rd0W

[ngar23]

chris moneymaker to me is a really bad, horrible player. did anyone see him at the poker superstars invintational two. he played horrible and ended up with ten points. i have no idea how he made it through the field. i wtach a little and he was really lucky during the whole tourney. he made some stupid calls that was luckily right. i just dont think he is that good of a player but apparently that is my opinion. at least greg raymer was pretty good. thanks

[BadAndy]

Chris Moneymaker is not a horrible poker player. He was really the first guy to win the WSOP when it mattered. To sift through a field of hundreds is not easy and it takes much patience. Moneymaker made his millions at the WSOP Main event and also won the Blind Mans Bluff wsop event which payed out fairly well. I don't blame him for screwing around @ pokersuperstars.... the 1st prize is 400k.. thats chump change for millionaires if u ask me! Overall moneymaker is not even close to the best players but he is definately good and an accomplished PRO. He isn't near as consistent as any of the other great players, but he has a main event bracelet....