disturbed by daniel's blog today

[custom36 4]

Disturbed is a good band.

[KTW 0]

There is no comparison between him betting $75k at a $5 10 game and me betting $100 at a .25 .50 game. NONE.

NONE but again I would have no problem.

[KowboyKoop 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it.Do you really think, that if you bought in for $200 and I bet $100,000 every hand that I would have an ADVANTAGE over you? Nope. In fact, if I were to do that it would give you the biggest earn you could possibly ask for.Well, assuming I got up at some point. If not you'd be a favprite to end up with all my money. If I gp in as an 80/20 favorite with you 10 times and youi allways have me covered and I'm allways all in, odds are you end up ahead.

If there is no advantage to buying in for more...than why does everybody (including Doyle Brunson) advise that you buy in for the maximum......

[rbakken2504 0]

Just wanted to put in my 2 cents even tho someone probably already stated this in many ways: In no way is what Daniel did bad for the game, I think its great for the game, IMO, onec Daniel sat down and people saw how he was playing they mustve been fighting to get on ht elist first, not only do you get to sit down and play with Daniel, but he sits at the table with $100K+ AND hes throwing it around! Its like christmas for the poker He couldve sat down with $5K and done the same thing, not because he's bullying people around, but because he is that good at reading people. Adn just because how he played that night made him some money and all his moves were working the OP calls his blog bragging, when i bet if Daniel lost $15,000, he wouldve posted the same story in his blog and nobody wouldve portrayed that as bragging.I think the OP should think before he speaks next time.

[grass Da 55 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it. haha, yes there is nothing unfair about buying in for a absurd amount of money. as long as it is within regulations, play ball. but saying there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more is just plain ridiculous and i can't believe someone of your statue would say something like that. only a freaking moron would buy into that crap.really enjoyed the blog daniel but do you really have to go around saying you can beat the crap outta every live nl game w/ your eyes closed. being a middle stake nl player i find it somewhat insulting. the whole world knows you're a great poker player man, no need to flex your muscles everytime you sit down at a nl table. i know i know, it's your blog and you can say what you want. yes, that is true but don't be an ass man. gl w/ the rest of 2005 daniel, you still top 20 on my list. 8)

[FileError404 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it. haha, yes there is nothing unfair about buying in for a absurd amount of money. as long as it is within regulations, play ball. but saying there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more is just plain ridiculous and i can't believe someone of your statue would say something like that. only a freaking moron would buy into that crap.really enjoyed the blog daniel but do you really have to go around saying you can beat the crap outta every live nl game w/ your eyes closed. being a middle stake nl player i find it somewhat insulting. the whole world knows you're a great poker player man, no need to flex your muscles everytime you sit down at a nl table. i know i know, it's your blog and you can say what you want. yes, that is true but don't be an ass man. gl w/ the rest of 2005 daniel, you still top 20 on my list. 8)

I totally agree.... no advantage? Paaaleeezzze... It's like coming to the final table of a tournament, chipleader 125000, 2nd 3000, 3rd 2700... how do you like your chances? Ok, you could double or triple up and leave, but no advantage? Gimme a break...

[blueodum 0]

The problem with waiting for a great hand is that DN might just decide to fold to your all-in when you get it. In the meantime, your stack is dwindling every time the blinds come around.Everytime you fold when you have a better hand than Daniel has you are losing money. So whatever he loses when you do call with the better hand (and you won't always have the better hand) is made up for by the numerous times that he steals your blinds or forces you out of a hand by raising you all in.It really isn't easy to play against someone as skilled as DN is in post-flop play when he is raising every pot pre-flop. That's true in limit HE; all the moreso in NLHE. That's assuming Daniel was playing his normal post-flop game, which, as I recall, is the point of "nutbar". It isn't like playing a billionaire novice who is throwing his chips around.Those people who think they would be +EV against Daniel in this situation (unless they are truly skilled players) are deluding themselves.

[Pupsta 0]

The problem with waiting for a great hand is that DN might just decide to fold to your all-in when you get it. In the meantime, your stack is dwindling every time the blinds come around.Everytime you fold when you have a better hand than Daniel has you are losing money. So whatever he loses when you do call with the better hand (and you won't always have the better hand) is made up for by the numerous times that he steals your blinds or forces you out of a hand by raising you all in.It really isn't easy to play against someone as skilled as DN is in post-flop play when he is raising every pot pre-flop. That's true in limit HE; all the moreso in NLHE. That's assuming Daniel was playing his normal post-flop game, which, as I recall, is the point of "nutbar". It isn't like playing a billionaire novice who is throwing his chips around.Those people who think they would be +EV against Daniel in this situation (unless they are truly skilled players) are deluding themselves.

it sounded like he hardly ever folded. it can't possibly be -EV to have someone raising extraordinary amounts to show off. and by the way, fileerror, your comment about the tournament final table is like comparing apples to datsuns. truly moronic.

[grass Da 55 0]

how many times can you all-in w/ your topset vs. daniel's flush draw and his 125k before he takes all your money.

[GCP 0]

Uhhh, what the heck is this whole thread about? Who cares? It's poker for Godsakes. Daniel is an "ambassador" of poker, so ... he has to go easy on the 5-10 guys? Since when? It's POKER FOR GODSAKES.

[chubby74 0]

One very important factor when trying to determine Daniel's intentions is the amount of time he played or planned on playing. It is not like Daniel sat at that table for hours grinding all the players out with a big stack. For players that could adjust their style of play to the situation it was an opportunity to double and thriple up. Or you could play rock tight and enjoy Daniel's company for an hour and a half. Is Daniel going to blind guys out??? It seems to me that the more time Daniel plays the bigger advantage his chip stack is because of his skill. Not necessary because of the stack itself. I am sure it was pretty cool to see those chips. Time is even more precious to Daniel now that he is a married man. Put yourself in Daniel's shoes before you judge him. I am of the opinion based on the time he played that the large buy in has no advantage and creates opportunities that players might not have if he bought in for lets say 5K. Also, if he did buy in for 5K and he goes all in and loses, he can just get more money. A lot of us can't buy in again for that session. Isn't the decision really the same for us if Daniel bets 5K instead of 47K?? Its still for all of our chips. I know if I was Daniel and was being honest, I wouldn't want stories going around how some noice from Illinois busted me in a 5/10 NL game. That is another reason besides having a good time why you buy in for so much. Also, this game is in Daniel's house.

[Loismustdie 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it.Do you really think, that if you bought in for $200 and I bet $100,000 every hand that I would have an ADVANTAGE over you? Nope. In fact, if I were to do that it would give you the biggest earn you could possibly ask for.Well, assuming I got up at some point. If not you'd be a favprite to end up with all my money. If I gp in as an 80/20 favorite with you 10 times and youi allways have me covered and I'm allways all in, odds are you end up ahead.

If there is no advantage to buying in for more...than why does everybody (including Doyle Brunson) advise that you buy in for the maximum......

So you win the maximum when you get big hands you nitwit. Next question.

[avsfan 0]

Uhhh, what the heck is this whole thread about? Who cares? It's poker for Godsakes. Daniel is an "ambassador" of poker, so ... he has to go easy on the 5-10 guys? Since when? It's POKER FOR GODSAKES.

If I was there. I would either be like "Holy Christmas!" or "hey I am way over my head here. I better bail." What a cool oppurtunity for those players brave enough to play with DN. I also had fun reading the blog it sounded like fun and made me happy.p.s. just my 2cents..

[grass Da 55 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it.Do you really think, that if you bought in for $200 and I bet $100,000 every hand that I would have an ADVANTAGE over you? Nope. In fact, if I were to do that it would give you the biggest earn you could possibly ask for.Well, assuming I got up at some point. If not you'd be a favprite to end up with all my money. If I gp in as an 80/20 favorite with you 10 times and youi allways have me covered and I'm allways all in, odds are you end up ahead.

If there is no advantage to buying in for more...than why does everybody (including Doyle Brunson) advise that you buy in for the maximum......

So you win the maximum when you get big hands you nitwit. Next question.

THIS THREAD IS FUNNY.

[Loismustdie 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it. haha, yes there is nothing unfair about buying in for a absurd amount of money. as long as it is within regulations, play ball. but saying there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more is just plain ridiculous and i can't believe someone of your statue would say something like that. only a freaking moron would buy into that crap.really enjoyed the blog daniel but do you really have to go around saying you can beat the crap outta every live nl game w/ your eyes closed. being a middle stake nl player i find it somewhat insulting. the whole world knows you're a great poker player man, no need to flex your muscles everytime you sit down at a nl table. i know i know, it's your blog and you can say what you want. yes, that is true but don't be an ass man. gl w/ the rest of 2005 daniel, you still top 20 on my list.  8)

There is no advantage- lets say the average stack in that game is 5,000- if he buys in for 5,000 and plays the exact same way everyone is still uncomfortable, it makes no difference- the only person/people who it makes a difference to is people who don't understand simple math and simple logic.

[grass Da 55 0]

There is no advantage- lets say the average stack in that game is 5,000- if he buys in for 5,000 and plays the exact same way everyone is still uncomfortable, it makes no difference- the only person/people who it makes a difference to is people who don't understand simple math and simple logic.

WHAO........................speechless.

[avsfan 0]

The other players should be more concerned that DN is at their table than anything else.

[grass Da 55 0]

only a freaking moron would buy into that crap.

There is no advantage- the only person/people who it makes a difference to is people who understand simple math and simple logic.

fyp

[akishore 0]

No offense, and you aren't the first person to say something like this, but there is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for more. There is NOTHING unfair about it.Do you really think, that if you bought in for $200 and I bet $100,000 every hand that I would have an ADVANTAGE over you? Nope. In fact, if I were to do that it would give you the biggest earn you could possibly ask for.Well, assuming I got up at some point.  If not you'd be a favprite to end up with all my money.  If I gp in as an 80/20 favorite with you 10 times and youi allways have me covered and I'm allways all in, odds are you end up ahead.

hey smash,haven't been following this thread all too closely, but skimming it i noticed this response.while you're partly right, i think a lot of people will read your post and, through their regular stupidity, jump to wrong conclusions.your statement assumes that when i buy in for $200 and go in as an 80/20 favorite, i can't reload if i bust. you're talking about the mathematical problem of gambler's ruin.if i can reload every time i bust, daniel has no advantage over me.aseem

[KTW 0]

I totally agree.... no advantage? Paaaleeezzze... It's like coming to the final table of a tournament, chipleader 125000, 2nd 3000, 3rd 2700... how do you like your chances? Ok, you could double or triple up and leave, but no advantage? Gimme a break...

I think they meant This assumes a ring game but if 9 have $500 or so and U sit down with $50,000 A real world situation I would give the advantage to the table and not the "maniac" so to speak. I saw a few posters say stuff like "I would not want DN at my table noway" and they say that I think not in regards to the the money but because he is DN. This is not a comparison nor a challenge but I would not be intimidated by playing with DN at all. I know he is great and has millions but I would not be scared at all to play him/with him in the least and I will try to elaborate.1...I have probably played more total hands than he has in his lifetime. I am 37 and have been playing 30 years---NON specific.2...DN would probably have the edge as far as reading me vs me reading him. That would force me to play my best.3...I would have the edge as far as the MATH aspect.This assumes a Ring game of a moderate level and a full table. I would have no problem playing him heads up but in this aspect the money is THE only issue.ps: It is not only DN but anyone.

[DB10-2 0]

Mind you I am not apologizing for having an opinion, however I think I made it very clear that:1.  I do like watching you on tv and largely respect you.snippedmajorleag

Thanks so much for that, I genuinely appreciate it. I realize you didn't mean to cause any harm or hurt my feelings. It's just that I take great pride in making the game fun for the players at the table. Making light of myself, poking fun at myself, and doing what I can to make it a rememberable experience for all. When I read the forum and saw that some people took it the wrong way, I was like, "I just can't win!" I felt like the readers would appreciate the goofy stories and the fun environment. Never, did I do what I did, or write what I wrote to brag in anyway. How's this dude, I guarantee you that if I played with you that I'd MAKE you have a good time... oh and the money will fly, booooy will it fly!

the reincarnation of mike caro, with 50x the skill?probably.

[blueodum 0]

KTW,If what you say is true, then you must be a highly skilled player. If so, I've no doubt you could cope with the this type of situation.The poster above had it right - it's not so much the stack, but DN at the table using the stack that makes it difficult. You know your opponent is highly skilled at playing post-flop has so much money that losing any number of pots in a row has no effect on him - well that is intimidating.Any time you play a pot you know you will have to make a decision for all your chips. Those are difficult decisions - and having to make them over and over again is going to mean an increased likelihood of making mistakes.

[Batch 0]

Okay I have a triple layer flame retardant suit on, as I fully expect about 4,000 degree flames coming my way.I of course like most of you have not met Daniel and would certainly like to at some point.  I like his style most of the time and enjoy watching him play on TV.Having said all of that I really was not happy to read his entry today about his amusing antics at the $5.00-$10.00 table beating the hell out of the little guy.I think Daniel needs to reflect back to when he was a new and or less financially secure player and how he would have felt if a very wealthy pro sat down at his $5-10 table and started betting tens of thousands of dollars.I think sitting at that table and playing any cards, or not looking at cards, to show off just because you have so much money that you can lose $100 or $500 or $3,000 and it has no effect on your life and well being, but prevents other players at the table from playing because they can't keep up financially is predatory and is unbecoming of a seasoned pro like Daniel.Yes, I know Poker by its very nature is predatory!  However this is clearly a horribly unbalanced situation, and other than to humiliate the little guy, I just don't see how this benefits Daniel, other professionals, The Wynn casino or poker in general.  It's not like winning a couple of grand will affect Daniel's life much, but it sure as hell would affect me for example if I had a strong hand but Daniel kept betting $10k and I had to keep folding and ended up losing $2-3k.I can tell you that when I played at the USPC it was a huge honor and thrill to play among some of the best and the brightest poker players in the world, and I was impressed by most of them.  There was one pro who I thought was very nasty but most of them were very gracious polite and accommodating.Chris Ferguson was a true gentleman, John Juanda also.  Even Mike Matasow was very nice each time I spoke with him.  The point is that I came away with a greater respect for these players, however if I had seen or heard that they were sitting down at what by their standards are ridiculously low levels and were doing what Daniel did, I would change my opinion of them in a hurry.Please understand that I have no issue with you dropping down in limits, and in fact I think it would be tremendous for the game of poker if you and your peers would do so from time to time to encourage people to play.  However if you step down then your game should still remain the same, and you shouldn't club people over the head because they are defenseless.Also as an ambassador for the Wynn, I would think that this is not the way you would want to conduct yourself.Daniel, I enjoy watching you and hope that you will take this to heart and think about it before responding, if you do respond, and I hope you do.Okay I am done, begin the flaming!

Id love a guy like that at my table.Chucking money in the pot all the time.Pick my spot to double up.If I didn't like it I woould get up and head elswhere.Sounds like me at a club tonight playing 1-1 blinds 60 max buy.I told them I would only play 9 hands and 9 only.I nailed them for 240 by bluffing and showing em and then when they didn't believe me and took a stand I flopped trips.Always love a charitble big stack in your game.That guy that called him with Q 10 got frustrated and said he aint got zilch.Smarten up

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

This whole thread is a waste of space. Poker is a gambling game. Some people have an edge some don't. Those who cannot recognize whether they have an edge or not will lose. Those playing out of their comfort zone will lose. Those who cannot adapt to changing conditions in the game will lose. Those who cannot handle losing their buy in one hand in big bet poker will lose. There is no sympathy for the suckers in any poker game no matter how disparate the skill advantage is, because noone forces another to gamble. That being said DN gave these guys the chance to make a big score. He said I came to gamble, you guys can have a huge edge and make a big score unless I get lucky. NL players dream of this scenario. Its like Xmas. The results dont even matter as long as they get their money in w/ the best of it. It doesnt matter if DN has me covered every time I have top ten hand preflop, because I will stick in my money getting the best of it, because thats what good gamblers do. This is accepted as an integral part of poker. You call it grandstanding, I call it free money. If you do not understand gambling please do not act like you do and then try and make up some gamblers code that "pros" and "cardroom ambassadors" should follow and expect to be taken seriously. Later in your post you say you do not like to gamble. This should be your clue to quit poker and to especially quit commenting on it. You simply cannot say that someone who voluntarily puts 125K of his own money into a 5/10NL game and voluntarily taking the worst of it in most situations in the game is somehow grandstanding. He gave these players a great chance to make great money, it just so happened that DN got lucky that night.

[majorleag 0]

8 pages is enough, so I am not going to comment on the original topic, everybody has their opinion and is entitled.What I find most interesting and at the same time frustrating and somewhat disturbing is the reaction that people have when either the topic is not flattering towards Daniel or they just plain don't agree.Daniel mentioned he was offended by my original comments. Now I made them respectfully and with thought and without any malice, and yet he was offended.Why is Daniel not offended by the reaction of many, not all mind you, but many of the posters on this forum towards me?It happened to be me this time, but this happens all the time to others as well. Whether you agree or disagree, like me or dislike me does not excuse the kind of behavior exhibited towards me on this forum.Many people have taken the opportunity of my post to make a personal attack against me. My words in many cases have been at the very least misconstrued and at the worst completely changed and twisted beyond all recognition.Why?Because I had the courage of my convictions and started a thread that was not popular with the majority knowing full well that I might/probably would be attacked?I have been accused in the past 8 pages of calling Daniel a cheater, I never did. I have been called an idiot, stupid, moron, tard and probably other names that I have forgotten.It makes it very difficult to want to have any kind of dialog on this forum and quite frankly I am offended by it and you should be too.Agree to disagree, but is it too much to ask that you do it respectfully?