Doyle Blog

[fleung22 1]

DOYLISM OF THE DAY: "Criticizing someone else's garden doesn't keep the weeds out of your own."This 700 billion dollar bailout doesn't seem to be changing anything. The stock market keeps going down and banks keep going under. The culprits are being rewarded at the taxpayer's expense. Lehman Brothers went under after awarding 50 billion dollars in options and bonus money to their top executives last year. Why can't the government step in and reclaim that money? The banks that tried to be prudent and make good loans are being punished along with the banks that knew they were making terrible loans. I taught Money and Banking at a University in Texas when I was a graduate student. I remember in our textbook a quote, "Bankers are someone who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining but wants it back the minute it starts to rain." Now, nobody has money to loan to the business people that need it. I don't know what the government is going to do now.CNN says that Senator Obama is already measuring the drapes in the White House. It does look like he is a shoo-in for the presidency even though there is lots of talk about his association with terrorists, him being a Muslim and some folks saying he is the Anti-Christ. While all these things are taken to the extreme, we shouldn't ignore that Obama didn't use good judgment about his professor, his friends and his spiritual advisors. As far as him being the Anti-Christ, forget that because he doesn't fit the prophecies. The Anti-Christ is coming out of the old Roman Empire which includes Iran, Iraq, Germany, Turkey and other countries in the Middle East. I still haven't made up my mind who to vote for but I'm tempted to vote for McCain. After listening to my poker pals about me supporting George W. Bush in a big way and how bad he has been; if Obama turns out to be a lousy president, I can tell them, "I told you so!" Whatever happens, I hope our country can recover and gain some respect back for all of us.I went to the Venetian and went through a rehearsal for the "Real Deal", a show that starts October 21st. It went very well with Scotty Nguyen and myself playing poker with six members of the audience. All the rest of the audience can play along with handheld devices that can call or fold. Prizes are given all through the show to the top scorers. Merv Adelson is the producer of the show and has a very professional team out of Los Angeles. The pros that will be in these bi-weekly shows are Scotty, Jennifer Harman, Eli Elezra, Todd Brunson, Gavin Smith, Phil Laak, Antonio Esfandiari, Phil Hellmuth, Daniel Negreanu and myself. Kenna James and Lacey Jones introduce each show and pick the folks out of the audience to play. We are going to have a lot of fun with this.I saw where Daniel was bragging about some of the young poker players' accomplishments. A lot has been made about the number of entries in the old days and some of the older guys' records can't mean as much. Well, a final table is a final table and in the "old days" the field was thinner but tougher. So when you judge from that, John Moss was at 22 WSOP final tables, won eight with two seconds. How about this one, Billy Baxter has been at 11 WSOP final tables, won 7 times with one second. I've been at 21 final WSOP tables, won 10 and have two seconds and three thirds. Some of us dinosaurs could close the deal also.Caddie: Sir, why do you play so much golf?Daniel: There is absolutely nothing else to do in Las Vegas.-DB

[king_tanner 84]

I don't think this is a shot at all... just a disagreement with 1 comment DN might have made.

[magnus72 0]

WOWafter the opening argument i was leaning towareds Mccain the he took a shot at my man. I dont know waht to do.

[Oziumrules 0]

Obviously Doyle wishes he had Daniels golf swing.....

[Lucoo_ 0]

Obviously Doyle wishes he had Daniels golf swing.....

From what i have heard Daniel wished he had Doyles golfswing ! Don't underestimate Doyle just because he is old

[ManPlus 0]

Germany is a middle eastern country?

[AcesUp46 0]

Back in the day, tourney players were not better. The "younger" tourney players that DN refer to are so much better than any of the old school ppl like Doyle or Moss. I'd take ppl like Sorel Mizzi over Doyle any day.(in tourneys only of course)

[Jargonator 0]

Back in the day, tourney players were not better. The "younger" tourney players that DN refer to are so much better than any of the old school ppl like Doyle or Moss. I'd take ppl like Sorel Mizzi over Doyle any day.(in tourneys only of course)

What exactly are you basing this on? seems like Doyle has barely played any tournaments since Mizzi came on the scene. So obviously you would 'take' mizzi.Someone else prob has a better insight on this than me but the game was likely soooo different back in the 70's and 80's so its pretty likely that those players were better at playing at that specific competition, and obviously the internet pros have some much more experience playing against modern fields.To say the internet players are better now, than the old school players were back then is pretty stupid, Just because the players you were likely to encounter were so much different and the game has changed so much.

[psujohn 0]

The game has changed a lot. I think any of the top online tourney guys of today would have completely destroyed those old games. Look at the success that Stuey Ungar had. Now I'm not saying that Stu wasn't a genius. But Stu also played a style that's more like the game of today. It'd be a bit like taking an average soldier with an M-16 back to fight against the best Samurai swordsmen.

[fleung22 1]

The game has changed a lot. I think any of the top online tourney guys of today would have completely destroyed those old games. Look at the success that Stuey Ungar had. Now I'm not saying that Stu wasn't a genius. But Stu also played a style that's more like the game of today. It'd be a bit like taking an average soldier with an M-16 back to fight against the best Samurai swordsmen.

I think Daniel and Doyle both have points. Today's players have a better understanding of the game of poker...no doubt. But Doyle competed and was successful in a different era.To say a top online tourney guy would destroy the old games is a bit unfair. What you really mean to say is if a top online pro went back in time, could handle the fact poker was illegal for the most part and the fact you could get robbed; could spot all the cheats ; practise/learn from the internet that doesn't exist; and had read Super System before Doyle wrote Super System...then yes, a top online pro would kill that game

[Jordan 1]

I guess it's nice that Doyle is old and isn't 100% totally stuck in his ways.It sucks to say, but most people after a lifetime of believing something are very senile and stuck in their ways. He seems open to other opinions though and making an educated decision for himself.- Jordan

[James D 0]

Whatever it is, you can only be the best in your era.This type of argument is similar to many other sports (not that poker is a sport)... say tennis, who is best Roger Federer or Bjorn Borg? It's impossible to say because the conditions/training/equipment/lifestyle are completely different. Sprinters are faster now, but that's not to say that someone from the 1960's wouldn't have been better in this era than they were then... people learn from their predecessors.

[Oziumrules 0]

From what i have heard Daniel wished he had Doyles golfswing ! Don't underestimate Doyle just because he is old

Are you high? Have you seen Doyles golf swing?

[Jam-Fly 8]

Back in the day, tourney players were not better. The "younger" tourney players that DN refer to are so much better than any of the old school ppl like Doyle or Moss. I'd take ppl like Sorel Mizzi over Doyle any day.(in tourneys only of course)

wow, hold your horses there big fellow.30 years ago, I'm pretty confident in saying that Sorel Mizzi would be far and away the best tournament player in the world at that time. The stuff he knows now, people couldn't have possibly known 30 years. The game has changed so much, that a top player now, is alot better than a top player 30 years ago. It's the same in Sports. Could guys like Marciano really stick it in a ring with a guy like Lennox Lewis or Niko Valuev? No, not really. It's not that Valuev is a superior boxer to Marciano, it's just that the technology, equipment, knoweledge etc. available to Valuev is so vaster and greater, that it is inevitable that Valuev will win. It's pretty similar in poker imo. Mizzi>Moss in simple facts. But if Moss was alive today, and in his peak today, it's possibly Moss>Mizzi.Doyle is alive today, and was alive when Moss played, and Doyle has a great record in both eras and is/was hugely successfully and a massive winner in both eras.

[psujohn 0]

To say a top online tourney guy would destroy the old games is a bit unfair. What you really mean to say is if a top online pro went back in time, could handle the fact poker was illegal for the most part and the fact you could get robbed; could spot all the cheats ; practise/learn from the internet that doesn't exist; and had read Super System before Doyle wrote Super System...then yes, a top online pro would kill that game

Well I wasn't thinking of a top online player going back to the wild west days but more the 80s and the earlier years of the WSOP and such. And yes, I agree that if the old guys had all the same tools/advantages that are around today they may have been much better than they were. Look at the Mayfair week on PAD. Those guys all said that at the time they where basically the pinnacle of poker knowledge because there weren't books/online forums/training videos/computer simulations, etc. They had a concentration of talented people who played and talked a lot about the game. And they pretty much suck by today's standards.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

Here's my take: "Back in the day" those guys were much better "poker players." They had better feel, instincts, and their tell reading skills would remain much stronger than the new generation. The new generation, though, simply plays the game more fundamentally correct. Their knowledge of the fundamentals isn't close at all. If you could go back to 1985 and get those guys to plan online poker the new breed would trounce them. Grizzled poker players are a dying breed, literally. The focus has changed so much to math and fundamentals that the old Amarillo Slim and Puggy Pearson tricks would be simply seen as "awful" in today's game and they would be awful. Not all the old school players would suck. The other thing is that, much like how Ivey trounces these internet superstars in the long run, the old school players adapt quickly so while you may have an early edge, they make adjustments and often improve quickly. If you look at Ivey's results against these kids, he loses in the beginning, and then virtually always breaks them.

[whatgreatis 0]

Pretty sure that if I went back to 2003 and played the cash games I'd make a killing.

[psujohn 0]

the old school players adapt quickly so while you may have an early edge, they make adjustments and often improve quickly

Do they though? I mean Stuey shocked and awed them pretty good. And besides Doyle who are the old timers who've successfully adapted to the new game and kept winning? Now that may not be fair because besides Doyle the rest of that breed have died or retired but surely there were generations of the same kind of player who came up after Doyle and before the DN, Ivey, Cunningham era.

Pretty sure that if I went back to 2003 and played the cash games I'd make a killing.

A wise man once said "I wish I were good when everyone sucked"

[DCJ001 0]

Caddie: Sir, how are you playing?Daniel: I'm hitting the woods great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them.http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/blogs/article/4658

[ChuckNorr!s 0]

Is it true that Shannon Elizabeth bang Todd Brunson a couple of times to get free big buy ins from Doyle's room? that is one sex video I dont want to see.

[I_fold08 1]

Is it true that Shannon Elizabeth bang Todd Brunson a couple of times to get free big buy ins from Doyle's room? that is one sex video I dont want to see.

i wouild watch it, shannon elizabeth is hot

[ChuckNorr!s 0]

i wouild watch it, shannon elizabeth is hot

I know shanoon is hot but seeing Todd naked is going to ruin the whole thing, dont you think? ask Jennifer Harman she'll tell you.

[bigbadbeat 0]

think the arguement is basically moot, put any of todays players against the old pro's 10, 20 30 years ago without any internet experience and they do not stack up so well.......put any of of those pro's at age 20 to 25 with as much experience as somebody that age has today and more than a few of them are scary to consider..... but you just can't do it.....its a good arguement, extremely good arguements both ways, but just has no correct answer.

[EStormOk 0]

i wouild watch it, shannon elizabeth is hot

Watch it hell, I would join in. Then Todd wouldn't be the ugliest one in the ordeal.

[Dirtydutch 8]

This discussion is a bit gay. Are you guys really concerned with how handsome the male in a porno is? Shannon Elisabeth is seriously about 15 years past attractive, though.