challenge match #5 daniel vs. barry *part 2*

[Scott31 0]

50 million is waaaay off. That I will say with all relative certainty. If you watch his cardplayer interviews, he all but says that if he lost all 9 matches, he'd be broke pretty much. "I've got a lot of gamble in me." No, he's not using anywhere close to proper bankroll management for this. You can be sure of that.

[mark33f 0]

50 million is waaaay off. That I will say with all relative certainty. If you watch his cardplayer interviews, he all but says that if he lost all 9 matches, he'd be broke pretty much. "I've got a lot of gamble in me." No, he's not using anywhere close to proper bankroll management for this. You can be sure of that.

That is what I was thinking, relatively little bankroll management and a lot of risk>???

[nutonflop 0]

Okay Alf, you win. I clearly do not know as much about these matches, Daniel's chances(or "edge" if you will), poker, or poker terms as you do.

I wasn't trying to defend either side Travis.I am completely in the dark on who has the edge, as are most people on this forum. You are probably one of the few with an educated guess on that.All I wanted to point out was, even IF Daniel were the better player in every game, he still might lose 8 straight, and that is variance, but an unaffordable one, you know?I don't want put you in any sort of awkard position, and I am sure you know thins about this that none of us do.It was just my two cents.

What is Daniel's bankroll anyway?Go ahead, tell me. I can keep a secret.At least you're still miles ahead of alfie on this. He's just now figured out that variance is indeed a factor here.

Daniel's roll is significant I am sure.What is the roll he needs to play these kinds of matches?Oh, I will give a modest answer of about 50 million. What do you think?

300 big bets at 4,000-8,000 is 2.4 mil. he won over 4 mil last year, minus taxes that's 3 mil. Before that he wasn't a major player. Even if he 3 years ago was playing 1,000-2,000 between tourneys and his historic down swing he couldn't have been worth more than 5 mil? that makes him worth about 5 mil. minus banroll. Which is why i call that playing scared

[Sundevils21 0]

The one thing I'm confused about and maybe some of you can help me with is this...Regardless of DN's bankroll and chance of going broke, WHY ARE THESE MATCHES A BAD THING? I've seen posts/threads here as well as on 2+2 about how DN should stop. WHY? ARE THESE NOT AS UNBELIEVABLY ENTERTAINING TO YOU AS THEY ARE TO ME?You've got one of the great poker players in the world saying, "pick the game, pick within this amount, and I'll play ya." How is this not the coolest thing in poker, EVER?Nobody else in the world has the balls to make such a high stakes/high risk challenge(to my knowledge).Help me out a little?(and I don't want to hear, "I just don't want poor DN to lose all his hard earned money")

[cdddc75 0]

300 big bets at 4,000-8,000 is 2.4 mil. maikng him worth about 2 mil. Which is why i call that playing scared

Raise your hand if you see the flaws with nutonflop's assumption that Daniel's BR is only 2.4 million or so.

[mark33f 0]

Yes they are greatly entertaining and fun, but I don't understand the point of them? It seems to me it is all about ego! It isn't about "having the balls", it is more or less who has the biggest ego to have the best players in the world come and challenge them to a game they most likely will be slightly inferior in. It is his life so whatever, but to me they are pointless...

[cdddc75 0]

The one thing I'm confused about and maybe some of you can help me with is this...Regardless of DN's bankroll and chance of going broke, WHY ARE THESE MATCHES A BAD THING? I've seen posts/threads here as well as on 2+2 about how DN should stop. WHY? ARE THESE NOT AS UNBELIEVABLY ENTERTAINING TO YOU AS THEY ARE TO ME?You've got one of the great poker players in the world saying, "pick the game, pick within this amount, and I'll play ya." How is this not the coolest thing in poker, EVER?Nobody else in the world has the balls to make such a high stakes/high risk challenge(to my knowledge).Help me out a little?(and I don't want to hear, "I just don't want poor DN to lose all his hard earned money")

It's jealousy or the natural human desire to avoid pain and discomfort. The posters on both boards can't grasp losing half a million in a freezeout. That number seems HUGE to them, but it's not a huge number to Daniel at all.That's why I broke it down in numbers that we can grasp above. The only other reason to hate on these matches is that they appear (at a surface level) to be taking away from DN's WSOP performance. To me, these matches are nothing more than a golfer like Tiger or Vijay spending hours at the driving range. They should only help DN tune his game. One thing is for sure: No one can rationally claim that Daniel isn't playing enough poker right now!

[cdddc75 0]

Yes they are greatly entertaining and fun, but I don't understand the point of them? It seems to me it is all about ego! It isn't about "having the balls", it is more or less who has the biggest ego to have the best players in the world come and challenge them to a game they most likely will be slightly inferior in. It is his life so whatever, but to me they are pointless...

The greatest athletes/businessmen/etc. all have some ego. Without that ego, they wouldn't have put in the time and energy to make themselves great in the first place.

[mark33f 0]

Yes they are greatly entertaining and fun, but I don't understand the point of them? It seems to me it is all about ego! It isn't about "having the balls", it is more or less who has the biggest ego to have the best players in the world come and challenge them to a game they most likely will be slightly inferior in. It is his life so whatever, but to me they are pointless...

The greatest athletes/businessmen/etc. all have some ego. Without that ego, they wouldn't have put in the time and energy to make themselves great in the first place.

Good point, but I still think they are pointless...

[cdddc75 0]

Yes they are greatly entertaining and fun, but I don't understand the point of them? It seems to me it is all about ego! It isn't about "having the balls", it is more or less who has the biggest ego to have the best players in the world come and challenge them to a game they most likely will be slightly inferior in. It is his life so whatever, but to me they are pointless...

The greatest athletes/businessmen/etc. all have some ego. Without that ego, they wouldn't have put in the time and energy to make themselves great in the first place.

Good point, but I still think they are pointless...

They are obviously motivating Daniel. That's the point.

[proletartiat 0]

Travis,I do think the open challenge is one of the sweetest things to happen in 2005. (much better if we could get some streaming coverage - I like to dream)The thing is - it goes aganst everything we're trying to learn - and it reeks of ego.DN has a propensity for the positive and it seems like he's acting drunk on his own ego. Sure its cool to play these matches, but is it smart? Time will tell I suppose. I think it very strange to challenge people in games where they have an edge. Playing Barry for 1 million in Stud? No thank you. Meanwhile, we have to watch him fumble around with pitiful WSOP results.One has to ask - is the entertainment value of these challenges - more important than braclets?

[mark33f 0]

They are obviously motivating Daniel. That's the point.Motivating him to...

[cdddc75 0]

They are obviously motivating Daniel. That's the point.Motivating him to...

I'm not going to claim that poker is a sport. But I am going to compare that elite poker players need motivation to get through a season just like a player in any major sport would.While every single WSOP tournament has a big prize at the end, playing the entire WSOP tournament season is still a grind. These challenge matches give Daniel a break from the tournament mindset, which in theory should keep Daniel fresher for the tournaments themselves.Only Daniel knows for sure if this is working well or not yet. It's pretty easy to guess from the rail that it's not working. We don't have nearly enough information to know for sure though.Remember that Barry is playing too. If these challenge matches are a mistake, then two competent poker professionals are wrong here.

[mark33f 0]

You may be right, but since these challenge matches started his tournament results have gone down. This is probably just natural variance and more or less coincidence, but if he designed these challenge matches to improve focus for tournaments, and he notices a difference I guess it does serve a point. But based solely on his current results it doesn't seem to us that it is working, but only Daniel knows if it is. So we will see...

[cdddc75 0]

You may be right, but since these challenge matches started his tournament results have gone down. This is probably just natural variance and more or less coincidence, but if he designed these challenge matches to improve focus for tournaments, and he notices a difference I guess it does serve a point. But based solely on his current results it doesn't seem to us that it is working, but only Daniel knows if it is. So we will see...

Well said. Good job of looking beyond current results.

[fuzzyD 0]

sorry for the horrible pun.I don't know what kind of deal Daniel has with Wynn, but I'm sure it's substantial.These matches are certain to generate an incredible amount of publicity for Wynn as well as the players, and if Wynn is partially staking DN, it may be money better spent (that's IF dn comes out on the losing end) than, say, a couple of 30 second spots during Super Bowl.And supposing DN were to "go broke," as y'all put it, something tells me that with his poker skills and personality, not to mention the intelligent ways he has been diversifying his assets, something tells me that he'll come out alright in the end. Win OR lose these big matches.Just an opinion, and certainly one laden with assumptions, but whatever the situation, I'm pretty sure DN could bounce back from even the worst conceivable beating.

[alf13 0]

Okay Alf, you win. I clearly do not know as much about these matches, Daniel's chances(or "edge" if you will), poker, or poker terms as you do.

I wasn't trying to defend either side Travis.I am completely in the dark on who has the edge, as are most people on this forum. You are probably one of the few with an educated guess on that.All I wanted to point out was, even IF Daniel were the better player in every game, he still might lose 8 straight, and that is variance, but an unaffordable one, you know?I don't want put you in any sort of awkard position, and I am sure you know thins about this that none of us do.It was just my two cents.

What is Daniel's bankroll anyway?Go ahead, tell me. I can keep a secret.At least you're still miles ahead of alfie on this. He's just now figured out that variance is indeed a factor here.

I can't believe this...I thought you already got it...Forget it.You didn't even understand what Absolute wrote.

[cdddc75 0]

The point you seem to be back to now is that Daniel cannot apparently withstand the variance of these matches.I'll ask you the same question I asked Absolute:What is Daniel's bankroll?It's even hard for me to keep up when you keep bouncing between Daniel's bankroll, variance, and edges (short term or long term) here. I guess when you get blown up on one point, it's time to pick another one.

[UglyJimStudly 0]

Regardless of DN's bankroll and chance of going broke, WHY ARE THESE MATCHES A BAD THING? I've seen posts/threads here as well as on 2+2 about how DN should stop. WHY? ARE THESE NOT AS UNBELIEVABLY ENTERTAINING TO YOU AS THEY ARE TO ME?

I think they're great. I wish they were being filmed for television or a DVD. I have two theories as to why people think DN should stop:1) Some people are kinda obsessed with DN, as happens among fans of any celebrity. They're worried about the risk to him if it all goes south.2) Other people are kinda jealous of DN. Young guy goes from 10-20 to 1000-2000 in what was it, about two years? Kinda makes the rest of us look bad - I certainly didn't move up that quickly, and I'm sure I'm not alone. The jealous folks want DN to stop because that would be an admission that he can't handle playing against poker's big guns.So far as his bankroll goes, on the one hand I can see where some folks are worried about the example set with regards to bankroll management, yada yada yada. But OTOH, much as I think DN seems like a nice guy and all, it's his money and I figure he can do anything he feels like with it. He's a big boy, and if he blows all his winnings on this one series, I'm sure he'll just roll up his sleeves and start getting it back.Besides, if I had DN's winnings, I'd probably blow it all on beer and strippers (not necessarily in that order). So he's being more responsible than I'd be in his shoes, so who am I to judge?

[alf13 0]

All I wanted to point out was, even IF Daniel were the better player in every game, he still might lose 8 straight, and that is variance, but an unaffordable one, you know?

Everytime I brought up varience, Alf would say that we're not talking about variance or the long term.I agree completely with this statement. Variance DOES play a role in determining if Daniel is "inferior" as Alf put it.I know you weren't taking sides. Either way, I don't get offended on a message board.Like I said, I'm not trying to show anyone up or anything. I just speak it like I see it.

"Inferior" can be the slightest of edges....and a small edge becomes a LARGE edge when you let your opponents pick the games.I LOVE these challenges but what I don't like is that Daniel Handicapped himself by allowing his opponents pick the games....He made himslef an unneccessary underdog.And BTW...I am rooting HARD for Daniel.....not only do I got a couple of bucks on Daniel to win the series but Daniel would do more to promote poker than Barry would......Barry would just sit on the corner of Tropicana Blvd telling every passer by "Hello, My Name is Barry Greenstein...I am the greatets poker player on the planet...did you know I beat Danny N BTW?...Are you a reporter?"

[alf13 0]

The point you seem to be back to now is that Daniel cannot apparently withstand the variance of these matches.I'll ask you the same question I asked Absolute:What is Daniel's bankroll?It's even hard for me to keep up when you keep bouncing between Daniel's bankroll, variance, and edges (short term or long term) here. I guess when you get blown up on one point, it's time to pick another one.

Blown up? Are you kidding?What is Daniel's Bankroll?I don't know...I can't only give an educated guess as can you....but that goes to a variance discussion.And I haven't bounced around on anything...you are the one that keeps throwing crap at the wall hoping SOMETHING sticks.

[cdddc75 0]

All I wanted to point out was, even IF Daniel were the better player in every game, he still might lose 8 straight, and that is variance, but an unaffordable one, you know?

Everytime I brought up varience, Alf would say that we're not talking about variance or the long term.I agree completely with this statement. Variance DOES play a role in determining if Daniel is "inferior" as Alf put it.I know you weren't taking sides. Either way, I don't get offended on a message board.Like I said, I'm not trying to show anyone up or anything. I just speak it like I see it.

"Inferior" can be the slightest of edges....and a small edge becomes a LARGE edge when you let your opponents pick the games.I LOVE these challenges but what I don't like is that Daniel Handicapped himself by allowing his opponents pick the games....He made himslef an unneccessary underdog.And BTW...I am rooting HARD for Daniel.....not only do I got a couple of bucks on Daniel to win the series but Daniel would do more to promote poker than Barry would......Barry would just sit on the corner of Tropicana Blvd telling every passer by "Hello, My Name is Barry Greenstein...I am the greatets poker player on the planet...did you know I beat Danny N BTW?...Are you a reporter?"

I think Daniel selected the games he did for one or both of these reasons:1. No one has a big edge on him in any of those games.2. If someone does happen to have a big edge on him in a certain game, he gets to pay for a lesson from a master.It's not like Daniel made every form of poker available here...

[cdddc75 0]

The point you seem to be back to now is that Daniel cannot apparently withstand the variance of these matches.I'll ask you the same question I asked Absolute:What is Daniel's bankroll?It's even hard for me to keep up when you keep bouncing between Daniel's bankroll, variance, and edges (short term or long term) here. I guess when you get blown up on one point, it's time to pick another one.

Blown up? Are you kidding?What is Daniel's Bankroll?I don't know...I can't only give an educated guess as can you....but that goes to a variance discussion.And I haven't bounced around on anything...you are the one that keeps throwing crap at the wall hoping SOMETHING sticks.

Get the crayon box out then and humor me. If you're going to draw me a picture of BG having a 55-45 edge in Stud, you better draw a Mona Lisa like picture for me to impress me.

[alf13 0]

The point you seem to be back to now is that Daniel cannot apparently withstand the variance of these matches.I'll ask you the same question I asked Absolute:What is Daniel's bankroll?It's even hard for me to keep up when you keep bouncing between Daniel's bankroll, variance, and edges (short term or long term) here. I guess when you get blown up on one point, it's time to pick another one.

Blown up? Are you kidding?What is Daniel's Bankroll?I don't know...I can't only give an educated guess as can you....but that goes to a variance discussion.And I haven't bounced around on anything...you are the one that keeps throwing crap at the wall hoping SOMETHING sticks.

Get the crayon box out then and humor me. If you're going to draw me a picture of BG having a 55-45 edge in Stud, you better draw a Mona Lisa like picture for me to impress me.

NO....a 55-45 edge is something a good poker player would have over a trained monkey.More like 50.5 to 49.5...which is enough to bleed a BB per hour.

[cdddc75 0]

NO....a 55-45 edge is something a good poker player would have over a trained monkey.More like 50.5 to 49.5...which is enough to bleed a BB per hour.

You're honestly making a big deal over one guy having a 50.5 to 49.5 edge over the other?That's your big deal here?I did misread you completely if that's the case. I didn't think anyone would be so obsessed over a fairly small edge in a freezeout match. I actually thought you had an enlightening point that I was missing.