Cardplayer Of The Year

[Nashtak 0]

Add a Live Poker Player of the year Award. You can't simply change the actual one to ''live'' only. We would have 2 awards that would require one to focus on either live or online to have a decent shot at winning. It wouldn't be much more fair if one played an outstanding year, on both front, and doesn't get the recognition he deserves.I believe we need such an award as ''the new'' Poker Player of Year award.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

I think you are confusing people by having 2 points. The first point I think everyone agrees with. There should be 3 seperate categories; live, online, and overall POY.Your second point though is discrediting online poker because it's a different game and you can't use all of your weapons (which obviously sucks for you because your "lock tells" reading ability seems to be world class so you lose an edge there.)The thing is I think just because something hurts you doesn't necessarily hurt poker in general just because you've been around for a long time.

I don't think there is a player who cares more about what's best for poker in general. I genuinely believe that. I always think in terms of what's best for poker ahead of what's best for me personally. -I think counting invitationals is an awful idea, despite the fact that I usually get invited-I think there are some other politically motivated reasons why it's wrong for online tournaments to count. Reasons that relate to the idea that certain events that may count also limit the field in terms of who can enter the event.-There are also other issues I don't want to get too deep into, but something along the lines of: when a player wins a live tournament- his points always count. Not so with online poker... there are other reasons, but I'm not comfortable saying them publicly. Essentially online it's very difficult to monitor ghosting and it's often very difficult to monitor if one or more people are playing from the same household.

[nutzbuster 7]

<---------- grumpy old live guy

[looshle 6]

I think they already have an award that rewards volume, the Online Player of the Year Award. That totally rewards volume. CardPlayer of the year award rewards volume in Live tournaments. I get that online poker is a skill game, yada yada yada, but what is wrong with separating the two forms of poker and giving an award for both of them separately? Why should it be essential to play online tournaments in order to get enough volume in to win CardPlayer of the Year?

So do you want an award, called cardplayer of the year that combines both of them or not?I agree that giving an award for each is a good idea, but your point here is completely contradicting you saying you think they should combine them for overall POY.

[Nashtak 0]

I don't think there is a player who cares more about what's best for poker in general. I genuinely believe that. I always think in terms of what's best for poker ahead of what's best for me personally. -I think counting invitationals is an awful idea, despite the fact that I usually get invited-I think there are some other politically motivated reasons why it's wrong for online tournaments to count. Reasons that relate to the idea that certain events that may count also limit the field in terms of who can enter the event.-There are also other issues I don't want to get too deep into, but something along the lines of: when a player wins a live tournament- his points always count. Not so with online poker... there are other reasons, but I'm not comfortable saying them publicly. Essentially online it's very difficult to monitor ghosting and it's often very difficult to monitor if one or more people are playing from the same household.

I don't know to what expand this could affect the Poker Player of Year Award but it seems to be a legitimate argument.

[looshle 6]

I don't think there is a player who cares more about what's best for poker in general. I genuinely believe that. I always think in terms of what's best for poker ahead of what's best for me personally. -I think counting invitationals is an awful idea, despite the fact that I usually get invited-I think there are some other politically motivated reasons why it's wrong for online tournaments to count. Reasons that relate to the idea that certain events that may count also limit the field in terms of who can enter the event.-There are also other issues I don't want to get too deep into, but something along the lines of: when a player wins a live tournament- his points always count. Not so with online poker... there are other reasons, but I'm not comfortable saying them publicly. Essentially online it's very difficult to monitor ghosting and it's often very difficult to monitor if one or more people are playing from the same household.

Agree with invitationals.First bolded, I think live events limit people as well. A lot of people don't waste money to travel to say Aussie Millions or alot of EPT stops simply because travel expenses are a huge cost compared to the ROI you expect to get back from the tournaments you play. Say you play a 10k with an ROI of 60% (pretty solid). That 6k that you've earned simply by playing is probably going to be cut in half or more due to flight/hotel etc. A lot of people learn to stay away from traveling too much unless they are a complete sicko. While this isnt the same as completely limiting someone from playing an event, I think it has more weight and effects it more than say a Stars pro not being able to play the FTOPS. (which sucks bc the jersey is sexy)I agree with the second bolded.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

So do you want an award, called cardplayer of the year that combines both of them or not?I agree that giving an award for each is a good idea, but your point here is completely contradicting you saying you think they should combine them for overall POY.

Here is what I'm saying:Option 1) Ideal: Online Player of the Year and a CardPlayer of the year with NO cross overOption 2) An Online Player of the Year, Live player of the year, and a combined award. I like Option 1) but could live with option 2). The current option is no good IMO. Certain online tournaments counting for both. Don't like that at all... as I said, no live events count for the OPOY. I've seen at the PCA how it works when a guy is deep. It's not the same as when a player is in a live tournament. In a live tournament, there is no one telling me what to do. With an online event, you may have 20 buddies railing and giving advice during a hand.

[Tha_Sika 0]

From 2003, Online Poker has changed the poker world drastically. I guess every single live player has played online at least one time in his life. So even though it has an own award for online, the CP should consider this ranking for the CPOY. Ignoriing online poker in the CPOY would be a huge mistake. Maybe a couple of years ago it would sound correct to exclude it from CPOY but now if we take into account the way it has expanded and the importance it has been given with a few notable tournaments, it would be a mistake to exclude it from the CPOY. A huge part of poker comes from online, 98% of poker players play online and I would say every single pro plays online as well. Having said that, it would be appropiate to include it as a form of poker in the CPOY and at the same time leave the Online reward as a separate one for those who doesnt play live tournaments which are the majority of the players. Thats the main reason why they have a separate category and at the same it should be part of the CPOY.it's not our fault that u struggle online, it's a form of poker. 7 years ago, I would probably agree with you DN, but today and having witness the poker boom transformation, you cannot say online tournaments should be neglected from CPOY, no way. Again, all live players play online and have their chances there, while 98% online players don't play live tournaments. That's the difference why there should be a unique award just for online and another one with a mix of both, but a solely live player award has no sense. And if it eventually exist, it would be meaningless.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

From 2003, Online Poker has changed the poker world drastically. I guess every single live player has played online at least one time in his life. So even though it has an own award for online, the CP should consider this ranking for the CPOY. Ignoriing online poker in the CPOY would be a huge mistake. Maybe a couple of years ago it would sound correct to exclude it from CPOY but now if we take into account the way it has expanded and the importance it has been given with a few notable tournaments, it would be a mistake to exclude it from the CPOY. A huge part of poker comes from online, 98% of poker players play online and I would say every single pro plays online as well. Having said that, it would be appropiate to include it as a form of poker in the CPOY and at the same time leave the Online reward as a separate one for those who doesnt play live tournaments which are the majority of the players. Thats the main reason why they have a separate category and at the same it should be part of the CPOY.it's not our fault that u struggle online, it's a form of poker. 7 years ago, I would probably agree with you DN, but today and having witness the poker boom transformation, you cannot say online tournaments should be neglected from CPOY, no way. Again, all live players play online and have their chances there, while 98% online players don't play live tournaments. That's the difference why there should be a unique award just for online and another one with a mix of both, but a solely live player award has no sense. And if it eventually exist, it would be meaningless.

You are so, so, so, so, so, so very wrong. All live players DO NOT play tournaments online at all but most online players eventually play in live tournaments. You have that completely backwards. You ever see Ivey playing online tournaments? No, not really. Neither do I. Neither does Juanda, neither do a lot of the winningest tournament players in the world. To say a live player of the year award is meaningless is retarded, because all live tournaments are full of both live and online players. You think it would be MEANINGLESS if a guy has the best year in live tournaments and plays exactly zero online tournaments? His accomplishment would mean nothing? That's absurd dude. His accomplishment would mean simply, that he performed better than anyone in the calendar year in live tournaments- that is NOT meaningless. How can you say that? Don't you see how wrong that statement really is? As I said, if you want to have a combined player of the year award, that's totally fine. However, if you are going to do that, AND you have a separate category for JUST online play you should ABSOFRICKINGLUTELY have a category for JUST live tournaments as well. How could that be "unfair" at all? If a guy only plays online, awesome, he has a shot at the OPOY. If a guy plays both, awesome, he can win the combined one. If a guy only plays live tournaments (there are more of these than you think) they should be in the running to win an award for their efforts in a category for ONLY live events. I'm right dude. Read it again if you need to a few more times, but I'm definitely right about that. There is simply no valid argument against the fact that if there is an OPOY year award along with the CPOY award that includes online events, there should also be a category for just live tournaments. On a totally separate note, when I make a final table in a live tournament you can be CERTAIN that I made every decision with no help during a hand. That alone separates live and online play in a very big way. There is no real way to enforce the one player to a hand rule online, and because of that, it's totally unfair to count those along with live events which are totally individual accomplishments and not a collective effort.

[TheWynn 0]

That's the difference why there should be a unique award just for online and another one with a mix of both, but a solely live player award has no sense. And if it eventually exist, it would be meaningless.

Uhhh....are you serious?

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

So.. the 1 online tournament a year that's counted in the Card Player of the Year standings has really got you that fired up?

[Tha_Sika 0]

I'm right dude. Read it again if you need to a few more times, but I'm definitely right about that. There is simply no valid argument against the fact that if there is an OPOY year award along with the CPOY award that includes online events, there should also be a category for just live tournaments.

Ok, it's a waste to keep discussion with someone so arrogant on his thoughts . If you think you are right, you are right then.If you think most online players play live then you are wrong. There're millions of online poker players and just 1% or even less play live tournaments. While those who play live most of them play online. I won't be tired of repeating that statement, and that is my VALID argument to say CPOY should count on both. Wanna make a live player of the year alone? I don't mind, but for me it wouldn't mean much as the Cardplayer of the year with both forms included. Online poker is way much more popular and is definately overcoming live poker. Live poker is not the same as it was a couple of years ago. And by the way they just count 1 or 2 online tournament does that makes so much difference????? cmon, if u good at poker u should do at least fine online.In order of importance the CPOY with both forms combined would definately be the best OVERALL player of the year, then it would come the online only reward and in third place I would put the live reward. A solely live player of the year, is a great accomplishment of course, but FOR ME it's like... incomplete.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

Ok, it's a waste to keep discussion with someone so arrogant on his thoughts . If you think you are right, you are right then.If you think most online players play live then you are wrong. There're millions of online poker players and just 1% or even less play live tournaments. While those who play live most of them play online. I won't be tired of repeating that statement, and that is my VALID argument to say CPOY should count on both. Wanna make a live player of the year alone? I don't mind, but for me it wouldn't mean much as the Cardplayer of the year with both forms included. Online poker is way much more popular and is definately overcoming live poker. Live poker is not the same as it was a couple of years ago. And by the way they just count 1 or 2 online tournament does that makes so much difference????? cmon, if u good at poker u should do at least fine online.In order of importance the CPOY with both forms combined would definately be the best OVERALL player of the year, then it would come the online only reward and in third place I would put the live reward. A solely live player of the year, is a great accomplishment of course, but FOR ME it's like... incomplete.

I'm not talking about the low limit grinders, I'm talking about the good players that you'll always see at the PCA. How does your argument defend against the fact that there is no way to verify if an online win is an individual accomplishment? There is no argument. None whatsoever dude.

[Tha_Sika 0]

I'm not talking about the low limit grinders, I'm talking about the good players that you'll always see at the PCA. How does your argument defend against the fact that there is no way to verify if an online win is an individual accomplishment? There is no argument. None whatsoever dude.

lol u asked the quesiton and then u answer yourself. What can i say. You win?...I think u are a great guy but seriously u r wrong in this one.

[lurbz 2]

I'm not talking about the low limit grinders, I'm talking about the good players that you'll always see at the PCA. How does your argument defend against the fact that there is no way to verify if an online win is an individual accomplishment? There is no argument. None whatsoever dude.

The thing that doesn't fit right with me in this statement is that while yes, there may be few players who deal with ghosting, etc., hand discussions still happen in live tournaments on breaks (should you choose to if you have anybody around who you discuss hands with) and come in to play later in the tournament as well. These discussions happen in both live and online play, online play is simply quicker about it. The events that qualify for CPOY, however, aren't going to have a large enough impact to affect things this much. You stated how the top tournament players don't play online - that's a choice, just as it's a choice of which WSOP events to buy into, etc. I think the reason CardPlayer HAS this differentiation in the first place (separate categories) is so that the heavy online players CAN have their own section so that the sheer volume of it doesn't affect the CPOY, as more of a protective measure, and implements only the extremely highest caliber online tournaments into CPOY consideration.That said, I still agree that the 3 award system is the way to go. However, I am curious as to why you are bringing this up now when it's not bolded as a "new to 2009" rule but was instead in place LAST year?

[Naslund44 0]

Something tells me we wouldnt be having this argument if DN won the WCOOP ME.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

The thing that doesn't fit right with me in this statement is that while yes, there may be few players who deal with ghosting, etc., hand discussions still happen in live tournaments on breaks (should you choose to if you have anybody around who you discuss hands with) and come in to play later in the tournament as well. These discussions happen in both live and online play, online play is simply quicker about it. The events that qualify for CPOY, however, aren't going to have a large enough impact to affect things this much. You stated how the top tournament players don't play online - that's a choice, just as it's a choice of which WSOP events to buy into, etc. I think the reason CardPlayer HAS this differentiation in the first place (separate categories) is so that the heavy online players CAN have their own section so that the sheer volume of it doesn't affect the CPOY, as more of a protective measure, and implements only the extremely highest caliber online tournaments into CPOY consideration.That said, I still agree that the 3 award system is the way to go. However, I am curious as to why you are bringing this up now when it's not bolded as a "new to 2009" rule but was instead in place LAST year?

I just noticed it this year. Never looked before...

[Tha_Sika 0]

Something tells me we wouldnt be having this argument if DN won the WCOOP ME.

Do u have any doubt about that?DN is behaving extremely speculative about that award. Counting 2 online tournaments should not mean big deal. This is all about personal interests and it's pretty clear though.Despite of this he will still be the most likeable pro (not counting PH, of course).

[Naslund44 0]

Do u have any doubt about that?DN is behaving extremely speculative about that award. Counting 2 online tournaments should not mean big deal. This is all about personal interests and it's pretty clear though.Despite of this he will still be the most likeable pro (not counting PH, of course).

you're kind of acting like he's not allowed to have his opinion.

[Vtlaxer09 4]

lol at the people who randomly decided to turn this into a bash DN thread.I think daniel is being pretty fair in his assesment that a Live POY, Online POY, and Combined is a perfectly valid system to put into place. Dont really see an option better than that.

[bigcoled 1]

I've thought it over more and I feel the ability to use stat trackers online is going to really skew this. All natural, no holdem manager, huds, etc it would be a more legit argument.

[Tha_Sika 0]

you're kind of acting like he's not allowed to have his opinion.

????????????????????????????????????He is acting as I'm not allowed to have my opinion, just take a look at his posts.

[CoolHandKai 0]

lol at the people who randomly decided to turn this into a bash DN thread.

Yeah, I was wondering about that, but since he keeps replying to Tha Troll's ludicrous posts, I guess he's encouraging it a bit.The differences between online poker and live poker are huge. That's not putting online poker down, that's just stating the obvious, which makes it even more surprising that people argue against it or take offense.That said, it's quite surprising to have an additional online category and then water down the other category with online stuff as well. If you have two awards, surely both of them should stay pure. If that can't be done, the next best thing would be three categories, as DN has said.

[MaxStPolish 4]

I don't disagree with this in part. I think the disconnect is the fact that a separate online player of the year ("OPOY") exists. Previously they was only the card player of year ("CPOY"). It sort of infers that OPOY is for online play and CPOY is for live play.Essentially, it would be in the best interest of Card Player and all players if they either created one other category for live player of year ("LPOY"), OR did away with OPOY and leveled the online and live tournaments that qualify for the singular CPOY award.I think a slight stretch of an example (using hockey) would be if a Prince of Wales trophy (eastern conference champ) existed, and the stanley cup existed (league champ, but a Campbell Bowl (western conference champ) didn't exist. The one sect of players would feel slighted that the other conference's achievements were celebrated at the conference level, whereas for them, either they win it all or they get nothing. It's not the end of the world, as the player's goal is to win it all, but it still feels like a bit of a slap in the face.This is coming from a guy that has never registered a POY point in his life, so it could be way off, but from the outside looking in this seems like a relevant analogy.

I agree completely

[Nashtak 0]

Am i the only one who sees Online Poker as a dumbed down version of Poker with the only upside of being cheap, accessible to everybody and give you the opportunity to play from home against anyone on the entire planet?Everything in Online Poker is in Live Poker while you can't say the same the other way around. All the maths, pot odds, betting pattern, fundamentals, etc are in Live Poker. It's pretty clear to me that Online Poker Players don't have differents abilities than Live Players, but a focus on the few aspects of Online Poker that actually matters while probably a lack of abilities in what is required to be a step ahead of the competition live. One could argue that Live pros can totally disregard what is essential to be successful Online just as Online players can do so to be successful live. But the real point is that Live's got it all, and Online is limited. If pros like Sammy Farha can tell you that they are all about reads and screw the maths, it doesn't mean that there aren't any pros who are successful using maths and pot odds (amongst others obviously, as live got it all and maths are not enough to win); think Ferguson or Harrington. Farha mgiht be a beast live and a fish online, and you might be the opposite; but that doesn't mean you are simply different, it means you mastered the limited version of the game and he mastered the real deal (and by real deal, i don't mean the FIRST or the REAL LIFE one, i mean the one who wasn't made to make it easy to play Poker on the go).In conclusion, the current system of Online Player Award and Player of the Year Award (including online) is OUTRAGEOUS, Online player award + Live player award + Player of year (overall) is a good idea to make it fair for everyone BUT an online player award + a Player of year award that excludes Online Tournaments seems like ultimately the best solution for Poker in general.I find it wrong that many seems to put Online Poker on the same level as Live Poker when, i believe, what they seem as Live Poker should be called Poker and Online Poker being a subgenre of Poker in general; a subgenre which was made for the sole purpose of being easy to use on-the-go from the cozyness of your home. But that point is open for arguments.PS: I also find it outrageous to see a handful of you disregard Daniel's arguments and label him a hypocrite for expressing his opinion, simply because his ideal would benefit him. We are talking about the same Daniel who was AGAINST re-buys in the WSOP, no? Don't get me wrong, but i doubt Daniel couldn't afford re-buys back then...