Kill Phil author and WSOP bracelet-winner Blair Rodman responds:
No. At any given point in a tournament, there will likely be a player who has an edge given the circumstances. The biggest factor is usually chip counts, and depending on the differentials, the chip leader will have a decided advantage. But I’m guessing your question assumes fairly equal chip counts, so let’s look at it from that standpoint.
If the final three are all world-class experts with precisely equal skill sets, then you’re correct that it’s more a matter of luck than anything else. But that’s never the case. Even experts have different areas in which they excel. For instance, one might be a monster at full-ring play (a full table), but becomes less effective as the game gets short-handed. Another might be the opposite, having hung on through the full-ring, then dominating as it gets to five or six. And another might be a heads-up specialist who’s managed to get to that position and can now unleash his power. A good example here is Joe Cada in 2009, a known heads-up specialist who was considered an overwhelming favorite when the tournament got down to two players (he won).
Position also has an effect. A player unlucky enough to have the big stack on his left is at a distinct disadvantage, and vice versa. An expert can look at the seating assignments at a final table and make an easy assessment of where the advantage lies at that point.
There’s also a tremendous amount of pressure at the Main Event final table, and some handle it better than others. One player might have the courage to make the play he feels is right, even though being wrong could make him look like a donkey. Another might not be able to pull the trigger on a play that, if successful, could propel him to the title. In these cases it often comes down to experience. Two examples of where a player was given credit for experience (and skill) relative to his final-table opponents was Greg Merson in 2012 and Martin Jacobson this year. Both were backed by bettors (yes, there are offshore lines on the tournament) to a degree that exceeded what their chip stacks alone going into the final table warranted. Both won.
Finally, we’ve been assuming that all three remaining players are, in fact, world-class experts. This also isn't always the case, as was seen with Steve Danneman in 2005, Darvin Moon in 2009, and Jay Farber last year. These players were all very skilled, or they wouldn’t have gotten to the point they did. But they all classified themselves as "amateurs" and would probably be among the first to admit that they aren’t world-class players. All three were beaten when it got to heads-up play, which suggests that skill predominated.
Poker is a very complex game, and there's a lot going on at the final table that isn't readily evident to the viewer. That's what makes it so fascinating.
[Editor’s Note: Our new book Flop, Turn, River addresses the different levels of tournament play, with sections devoted specifically to short-handed and heads-up play. One of FTRs authors is Joe Hachem, who defeated the aforementioned Steve Danneman to become the 2005 WSOP Main Event champion.]
