Jump to content

daniel's explanation?


Recommended Posts

I honestly have no desire to read every response made in regard to Daniel's one session at the Wynn. Having said that, I'm not sure if any of you have played with Daniel in a live game before, but I have. And I would like to talk about it a little bit, just to clear the air.I've played with Daniel in live games two times. Once was a pot limit hold em game with 20-40 blinds ( that was several years ago). And the other session was a 10-20 no limit game. Each session that we played, he had the WHOLE TABLE COVERED. He played fast and loose, and was having a good time. In fact, EVERYONE was having a good time. Both sessions, he played just about every hand. Raising, re-raising, etc. I was lucky enough to have position on him both times. The no limit session was funny, it would appear that he had a "normal" stack. But he had the 5 or 10k chip for special occassions. The first hand I played with him, he broke me. I've talked about this hand before, so I feel no need to get into it again. But I continued to play, and ended up booking a small win.The point is, he was giving action and getting action. The ONLY advantage he had was a psycholigal one. IF you want to look at that way. He also happened to be a much better player than the whole table, myself included. But because he WAS playing so wrecklessly, it evened out the playing field. And that's what many people fail to realize. If Daniel wanted to, he could sit down in a 10-20, 20-40, or 100-200 no limit game and break everyone just by playing his A game. But instead, he does everyone a FAVOR, and has a nutbar session.For those of you who have ever played with me at a "strat table" on Party, I usually do something fairly similar. Win, lose or draw, everyone has a good time. I play waaaay too many hands, and give a ridiculous amount of action. At .50-1, I feel that I can afford the loss. But you have to earn it. Obviously the same is true of Daniel, he's not giving his money away per say. But he is laying one hell of a price an you getting it.For those who don't like this, or are offended by it. The next time you see a fish tank, don't tap the glass. Until you've sat with him and played in one of these sessions, don't knock it. He certainly isn't about to quit you just because you book a 5k win. YOU as the player have the advantage. If you are afraid of going bust, don't play. If his money intimidates you psychologically, don't play. But once you get past those silly obstacles. Be sure to take advantage of people who sit down with ton of money and are willing to gamble it up with you. Statistically, you will be a favorite. Whether you're a math guy or not, you should be able to see the logic in that. Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I honestly have no desire to read every response made in regard to Daniel's one session at the Wynn. Having said that, I'm not sure if any of you have played with Daniel in a live game before, but I have. And I would like to talk about it a little bit, just to clear the air.I've played with Daniel in live games two times. Once was a pot limit hold em game with 20-40 blinds ( that was several years ago). And the other session was a 10-20 no limit game. Each session that we played, he had the WHOLE TABLE COVERED. He played fast and loose, and was having a good time. In fact, EVERYONE was having a good time. Both sessions, he played just about every hand. Raising, re-raising, etc. I was lucky enough to have position on him both times. The no limit session was funny, it would appear that he had a "normal" stack. But he had the 5 or 10k chip for special occassions. The first hand I played with him, he broke me. I've talked about this hand before, so I feel no need to get into it again. But I continued to play, and ended up booking a small win.The point is, he was giving action and getting action. The ONLY advantage he had was a psycholigal one. IF you want to look at that way. He also happened to be a much better player than the whole table, myself included. But because he WAS playing so wrecklessly, it evened out the playing field. And that's what many people fail to realize. If Daniel wanted to, he could sit down in a 10-20, 20-40, or 100-200 no limit game and break everyone just by playing his A game. But instead, he does everyone a FAVOR, and has a nutbar session.For those of you who have ever played with me at a "strat table" on Party, I usually do something fairly similar. Win, lose or draw, everyone has a good time. I play waaaay too many hands, and give a ridiculous amount of action. At .50-1, I feel that I can afford the loss. But you have to earn it. Obviously the same is true of Daniel, he's not giving his money away per say. But he is laying one hell of a price an you getting it.For those who don't like this, or are offended by it. The next time you see a fish tank, don't tap the glass. Until you've sat with him and played in one of these sessions, don't knock it. He certainly isn't about to quit you just because you book a 5k win. YOU as the player have the advantage. If you are afraid of going bust, don't play. If his money intimidates you psychologically, don't play. But once you get past those silly obstacles. Be sure to take advantage of people who sit down with ton of money and are willing to gamble it up with you. Statistically, you will be a favorite. Whether you're a math guy or not, you should be able to see the logic in that. Good Luck.
Owned.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to know what the people sitting at the table actually think, but here is what how I imagine they feel.Well Honey, I hate to do this in an e-mail, but I know you don’t go anywhere without your laptop. As you know, I’m supposed to be downstairs playing a little no-limit holdem and I was for a while. I was holding my own and winning more than I was loosing and turned my $2000.00 buy in into $3400.00 in just a few hours. Then things changed. Do you remember that Pro player I like, Daniel Negreanu? You know the one, I’m always on his website reading what he’s been up to and checking out the posts on his forum. Anyway, there I was, playing pretty well, when guess what? He sat down at my table! Wow, was I excited, and he was just as engaging, nice, and friendly as I’ve seen on tv and in his web-blog. He just had one annoying habit. See, he sat down at the table with $125,000.00 in checks…way more than anyone else at the table. So what did he do that was so annoying? He would raise the blinds by like a bazillion dollars, forcing anyone who wanted to see the flop to go all in!I sat back and watched for a while; I really didn’t have the cards to commit all of my hard won cash. I know I could have gotten up and left the table at anytime, I wasn’t held hostage or anything. What the heck, I was having a good time, so was the rest of the table. A few people were calling his huge bets (these are the same fish I was taking money from before DN sat down), when finally I get the hand. Ah Ac…the big guy…ok, I’ll just triple the BB, a normal sized bet because I’m thinking Daniel is going to raise it and put me all in even though he hasn’t looked at his cards yet. I was right, he did, (still without looking at his hand); ok I’ll call. DN flips over his cards and has 7-2 off suit, see Honey, he can make these crazy raises because he’s got such a HUGE advantage in the cash department. He even said that he wanted to see most of the flops. So, I’m like a huge advantage pre-flop and feeling pretty good. Then the cards come out, 7, 7, 2! I’m basically dead because I need the last two aces in the deck (assuming one wasn’t mucked already).Anyway, I lost. I hadn’t planned on losing all of my gambling money on the first day, but; what the heck, I was having fun. (I know, I could have left the table at anytime) So, I’m back home, sitting in the Lazy-Boy in front of the tv, in my favorite underwear and talking to the dog (A-A vs 7-2 and I got OUT FLOPPED because he could afford to make crazy calls like that). The dog doesn’t really understand, but I think he feels bad for me too. I’m going to have a meatloaf sandwich and go to bed. Have fun for the rest of the trip and if DN sits down at your poker table with a stack like that, RUN!!!!!!!!!!Your loving HusbandThe loser

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant believe im replying to this, but its really not that difficult. there are advantages to big and small stacks but the greater advantages lie in having a short stack, especially in no limit. if your playing a world class player would you rather have 125k or 5k.. assuming your wc player is better than you you better go with the 5 k or your gonna get hurt bad. its a lot easier to play a short stack well and not get into trouble.the other key to this is that you can leave whenever you want. you dont have to repeatedly survive all in confrontations all night if you dont want too. if you double up twice and have 20k and are uncomforatable with it then leave. thats quite a night at 10-20. if you want to go for a life changing score then you can do that too (depending on whats lifechanging for you). put me in this situation all day every day. it may be uncomforatable sometimes but it is definetely +ev if the big stack is playing less than optimally.when your in a situation where you can lose a little or win a lot your in a classic good gambling scenario.matty

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure of how a value of "right" or "wrong" can be placed on Daniel's actions here.Everything he did was well within the rules governing the game and from the sounds of it anyone playing at that level should have been able to easily make the adjustment to create a +EV situation for themselves.Complaining about his behavior there is about the same as telling bad beat stories.I'm sure they will not have a problem letting people buy into the big game with 100 million and play like a maniac.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's something to keep in mind - and I think a lot of people really don't understand this about NL cash games.If you were at that table with DN, and you had a stack of $4000, while he's sitting with $125,000 behind him...how large is his stack effectively when he's in a pot with you?The answer, of course, is $4,000.He can't use the other $121,000 against you. It does nothing. Well, maybe if you throws the chips really hard, he can bruise you...but that's really about it. From your perspective, he might as well have sat with $4,000, or $10k, 0r a million - it doesn't matter one bit, and should have no effect on your play whatsoever.There are players who will be 'bullied' by big stacks in cash games, but if this is a disadvantage for them, it's their own fault! There's nothing the big stack can really do to bully you, assuming you're playing within your bankroll and can afford to put all your chips in the pot when appropriate.

DN flips over his cards and has 7-2 off suit, see Honey, he can make these crazy raises because he’s got such a HUGE advantage in the cash department. He even said that he wanted to see most of the flops. So, I’m like a huge advantage pre-flop and feeling pretty good. Then the cards come out, 7, 7, 2! I’m basically dead because I need the last two aces in the deck (assuming one wasn’t mucked already).
I'd be happy to get as much money in preflop with aces against ANY hand, ANY time I could! His "advantage" in the cash department doesn't change your expectation on that hand at all, and you should be so extremely lucky as to get that much money in with AA preflop every time. Anyone who would actually feel like someone who got their money in with the worst hand with all that cash behind them actually had an advantage in this situation knows nothing about poker. That's exactly what you want to happen with AA every single time.I'm not sure if you were mocking people who were feel that way, just speculating on how a fish at that table might feel, or actually feel that way yourself, so I'm not necessarily attacking you. :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites

why is everyone throwing a hissyfit about this that was like the funniest blog daniel ever wrote I would only complain if that was my lunch money on the table I cant beleive people on a poker site are feeling bad about people who lost there money in poker thats what were all trying to do is get the money from the other people this was slightly overboard yes but if everyone was having a good time then I dont see what the big deal was besides even if you were one of the people playing at the 5 10 and lost you lost to DANIEL F***ING NEGREANU man that would be like a story I would tell my kids

Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand both sides of this ...but Daniel has to believe that a fellow with a million dollars versus my 5 grand with take some "wild" chances against my perfect plays and eventually win with a lucky shot...all in that is..
With 10-20 blinds??? If you have $5000 in front of you and the guy tries to hit a gut shot on you he isn't going to hit it very often. When he misses, you'd have $10,000. You could keep playing, or take your profit. It amazes me that this concept isn't sinking in with many of you. As for me being an arrogant jerk, dude, everybody was having a good time. I was mocking myself, having fun, being a goofball. Everyone enjoyed it, why does that bother YOU?
ignore them..i would have gladly sat with 2k on that table...just for the fun of it and wait for the nuts and take 2k from you..!i u wouldn't mind???lol
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here is the thing, and this is purely hypothetical so bare with me, but let Daniel sit down at a table with $2,000.00 and someone else (me maybe) play with $125,000.00; I guarantee Daniel will lose that two grand to me before I lose the 125 to him…that’s why it’s an advantage. Have any of you thought of that? If you had $125,000.00 vs ANY pro’s $2,000.00, who would have the advantage? Do you think you would take their money? If you can’t…figure out why you are still playing poker. I don't know how easier this can be said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CamelVic, you are wrong and while that is extemely frustrating, I will give it one more shot to explain it to you. I would be a favorite over a worse player if I had $2000.00 in front of me and my opponent had $125,000 in front of him provided the blinds stayed small, like $5-$10. Here is the thing, I don't HAVE to continue to risk my whole bankroll against the big stack in a cash game. I could buy in for $1000 and if I lost that, I could rebuy for another $100 if necesary. If I was the better player, chances are that after a six hour session I would be ahead. Let's say for this example I won $2000 after six hours. Now I could quit, and the next day buy in for $1000 again. If I lost that, again I could buy in for another $1000. If I was the better player, and had the time to do so, I would win every last dollar of that $125,000. Also, I would be the FAVORITE to do so. I understand what you are thinking: you are thinking in a freeze out that the big stack would win more often than that. Of course, while that's true, if the $2000 stack happens to win he gets 62.5 to 1 on his money! So, if the $2000 stack was able to win even the freezeout just once out of 50 times, he'd make a very nice profit. Does that help you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Daniel,I just wanted to say I understand what you're saying and agree.... :-) Just wanted to know which is your favorite site to play online poker?...sorry this is off topic... I played with you once on poker mountain and accidentally asked you about Lori and it was when you guys were broken up and i felt bad about it.....now I'm happy that you guys got married (same day i was at my cousin's wedding). Belated congratulations...i love reading your blog!! Good luck on all your future tourneys!!Carey

Link to post
Share on other sites
CamelVic, you are wrong and while that is extemely frustrating, I will give it one more shot to explain it to you.
harringtons M to be a fully functionling poker player (the green zone) at 5-10 would be $300-600. 2 grand is quite an ample role. it DOES NOT matter what your oppopenets role is if you are fully funcitoning and not short stacked in relation to the blinds. It'll just take longer to break him. hope this helps daniel. good luck!
Link to post
Share on other sites
CamelVic, you are wrong and while that is extemely frustrating, I will give it one more shot to explain it to you. I would be a favorite over a worse player if I had $2000.00 in front of me and my opponent had $125,000 in front of him provided the blinds stayed small, like $5-$10. Here is the thing, I don't HAVE to continue to risk my whole bankroll against the big stack in a cash game. I could buy in for $1000 and if I lost that, I could rebuy for another $100 if necesary. If I was the better player, chances are that after a six hour session I would be ahead. Let's say for this example I won $2000 after six hours. Now I could quit, and the next day buy in for $1000 again. If I lost that, again I could buy in for another $1000. If I was the better player, and had the time to do so, I would win every last dollar of that $125,000. Also, I would be the FAVORITE to do so. I understand what you are thinking: you are thinking in a freeze out that the big stack would win more often than that. Of course, while that's true, if the $2000 stack happens to win he gets 62.5 to 1 on his money! So, if the $2000 stack was able to win even the freezeout just once out of 50 times, he'd make a very nice profit. Does that help you?
i honestly don't think you would be a favorite daniel. although i believe i could be wrong in this assumption but one assumption i won't be wrong about is that when two players of equal skills sit at a nl table, one w/ 2k the other w/ 125k, clearly you will agree that the player that has 125k will have an advantage over his equally skilled opponent who has 2k. now lets take it back to the wynns some days ago. daniel negreanu sits down at the 5-10 nl table w/ 125k. are you suggesting that you were the worst player at the table and that your opponent could actually taken advantage of your big stack. are you suggesting that there were a possiblity that daniel negreanu could have lost his entire 125k at 5-10 nl. daniel, you were playing w/ inferior opponents w/ a superior stack size and your opponents had no chance what-so-ever. clearly you had an advantage. was it an unfair advantage? ABSOLUTLY NOT.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's suppose Daniel sat down at the table with precisely one dollar more than the biggest stack. He just plopped down said "I'll have what he has, and another white."Does he have an unfair advantage? not especially. It's his right to buy-in for that much.Now suppose, that whenever he drops below the big stack, he reloads to one dollar past. Again, at no point does he have a ridiculous advantage, but he is always the big stack and can eliminate anyone.The only reason people are intimidated by the big stack is that it is there all at once. For the purposes of perception, it would have been nicer to have segmented it out so that people would feel better about their chances. Unless daniel just wanted to have a comedy hour and do something ridiculous. Which he did. The only difference between what he did and the strategy I described was efficiency and perception. In a no-limit cash game, as long as I am willing to reload , a $2,001 stack has exactly the same advantage over $2,000 as a $2,000,000,000 stack. Now, let's go a little further. To at least 1% precision, a $2,001 stack IS a $2,000 stack. So there is no advantage.Obviously, the willingingness to reload is a major factor. But if you are at a table, unwilling or unable to reload, you are seriously at the wrong table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's suppose Daniel sat down at the table with precisely one dollar more than the biggest stack. He just plopped down said "I'll have what he has, and another white." Does he have an unfair advantage? not especially. It's his right to buy-in for that much. Now suppose, that whenever he drops below the big stack, he reloads to one dollar past. Again, at no point does he have a ridiculous advantage, but he is always the big stack and can eliminate anyone. The only reason people are intimidated by the big stack is that it is there all at once. For the purposes of perception, it would have been nicer to have segmented it out so that people would feel better about their chances. Unless daniel just wanted to have a comedy hour and do something ridiculous. Which he did. The only difference between what he did and the strategy I described was efficiency and perception. In a no-limit cash game, as long as I am willing to reload , a $2,001 stack has exactly the same advantage over $2,000 as a $2,000,000,000 stack. Now, let's go a little further. To at least 1% precision, a $2,001 stack IS a $2,000 stack. So there is no advantage. Obviously, the willingingness to reload is a major factor. But if you are at a table, unwilling or unable to reload, you are seriously at the wrong table.
Thank you for making this point.This point seems pretty obvious, but apparently has been overlooked by numerous people.Many players will make an effort to keep their chip stacks at the maximum allowed amount in a NL ring game. This gives them the "presence" of being able to knock anyone out on any one hand.But having as many chips as the next guy... or having 10xtimes the next guy does not make any difference on any one hand.And since anyone can leave at any time, you can only look at things one hand at a time.--cnm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's suppose Daniel sat down at the table with precisely one dollar more than the biggest stack. He just plopped down said "I'll have what he has, and another white."Does he have an unfair advantage? not especially. It's his right to buy-in for that much. does he have an unfair advantage? nodoes he have an advantage? of course he doeseverytime you sit down at a nl cash game table where you have the biggest stack of 3k or 125k where he can win the maximum amount of money from any particular player in any particular pot, it's an advantage. a player w/ a stack size of 1k in a 5-10 nl game can not and will not have the ability to break a player w/ a stack size of 3k, therefore he can not win the maximum amount against that player in any pot. he is at a disadvantage to that particular player. if you can't understand why having one of the biggest stack size is an advantage, than nl cash game is not your game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
CamelVic, you are wrong and while that is extemely frustrating, I will give it one more shot to explain it to you. Daniel, please stop it. You DO NOT owe anyone an explaination. It is your money and you have the right to play anyway you want. It is total bull that you need to defend yourself at all. Please Stop.
Link to post
Share on other sites

quoted: daniel negreanuthere is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for moredoesn't matter if daniel's buy-in was 125k, 3k, or 4k. as long as he was one of the biggest stack at the table, there will be an advantage, and the statement quoted from him above is false.

Link to post
Share on other sites
quoted: daniel negreanuthere is NO ADVANTAGE to buying in for moredoesn't matter if daniel's buy-in was 125k, 3k, or 4k. as long as he was one of the biggest stack at the table, there will be an advantage, and the statement quoted from him above is false.
The skill level difference between Daniel and the average player would be about the same as the difference between the average player and someone who has NEVER played the game before.Now if you sat at a $5/$10 NL game with $500 and a well known person who NEVER played the game before sits down with $10k...Would you feel like HE had the Advantage??????? I sure hope Not....
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if you sat at a $5/$10 NL game with $500........anyone sitting at my 5-10 nl game w/ $500 not planning on doing a hit and run is a fish.and a well known person who NEVER played the game before sits down with $10k...yeah, i'm pretty sure this apllies to daniel negreanu. "look ya, a donk w/ $125k. wooooohoooooooo." :club:

Link to post
Share on other sites
His play during this year's WSOP main event was pure genius, even though he was out quick.
... since February he's been a break even player in ring games and is down in tourneys. He's lost his focus.
Ummm...so which is it? On the one hand you say he's playing the best poker of his career, and in the same paragraph, you say he's lost focus. You cant have it both ways.Some of you (not necessarily BillyBob) are totally hung up on the huge buyin. In any given hand, his stack is exactly as big as the next biggest stack at the table. Anything else is essentially rebuy because it doesn't play. If he bought in as a modest big-stack, and rebought to keep the table covered, nobody would have boo to say about it, and it would have exactly the same impact on the game. This is not hard to understand. DN would have an advantage in any game due to his skill. He negated some of that advantage by juicing a lot of pots, and giving the field the opportunity to come and get it. He then challenged himself to overcome his own self-imposed handi-cap. I would MUCH rather play DN under these circumstances than playing against his "A" game.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...