InertGrudge 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Are recognizable poker pros spending more time playing online MTTs or live games and flesh and blood tourneys?Any good economic analysis has to include intagibles just like you include reads in your figuring of whether to fold, call, bet, raise. Putting exact figures on the intangibles isn't easy, but it's certainly necessary if you want to get the most out of your money.If all the poker pros we know and love are spending all their time playing online MTTs, then I am obviously wrong.MontyThe point is that they don't have to be spending 'all their time' playing online. Most are able to adapt (and do so well) to the online game -- enough so that they can compete in the larger tournaments.It's still poker. And they're damn good at that.To say DN or any other pro "couldn't" win a major online tournament is simply false. They could and I would give them a better chance than you or I. Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 The point is that they don't have to be spending 'all their time' playing online. Most are able to adapt (and do so well) to the online game -- enough so that they can compete in the larger tournaments.It's still poker. And they're damn good at that.To say DN or any other pro "couldn't" win a major online tournament is simply false. They could and I would give them a better chance than you or I.I'm not arguing that DN or any other pro couldn't win a major online tournament!? Of course the pros can win the online tournaments, I already said the initial question posed by the thread is silly.I am arguing against:That 10k would buy him into 47 "big" tourneys (216 buy in)--and that he'd likely make more in 47 'big' online tourneys than he would from one live cash. In fact, I'm not really arguing against that per se. I am simply saying that if they are a poker professional -and- you know their name, then that person is better served spending their time in a cash game or a live tournament than they are playing in a big, online MTT.If they don't have anything else on the schedule, they could play and they could win and etc etc etc, but they are certainly not best served by entering 47 big online tourneys. In fact they are better served by buying into 47 $10,000 buy-in events than using $10,000 to buy into 47 big online events. $10,000 is a pre-flop raise, a big bet, a post-oak bluff, to these guys.Playing in a lot of big online MTTs is not the best way for a top caliber poker player to make money, if it is not the best way to make money it is EV-Monty Link to post Share on other sites
DrawingDeadInDM 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 You miss the point, Monty, and you miss it badly. What is the title of this thread? Here's a hint..I'm in window.. "Replying to Could Negreanu Win A Major Online Tourney?"The answer? Yes. So could a retarded dachsund smacking his face on a mouse if he happened to play it right. Is Daniel Negreanu more likely to win a 'major online tourney' than the average tourney player? Maybe, maybe not. I'd think yes, though. Would it be more worthwhile an investment for him to play all the Sunday tournaments? According to you, no, from all of his 'lost appearances' from 6 p.m. EST, Sunday, to early Monday morning(apparently that's a pretty popular time for speaking engagements). If you asked Daniel--as a poker player--which is the best bargain, and which would he rather do. Risk 10k to win 500k (WSOP Circuit Event). OR, he could risk $200 to win 225k(or thereabouts) in the 750k guarantee...I bet I know his answer.Edit; This post was made before you made your last reply. If you don't get how 47 buy ins to a 500k prizepool is better than 1 buy in to a, say, 5 million dollar prizepool, well, I can't really help you. Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 According to you, no, from all of his 'lost appearances' from 6 p.m. EST, Sunday, to early Monday morning(apparently that's a pretty popular time for speaking engagements).This is a melodramatic oversimplifcation of my argument. Intangibles that I am talking about include a lot of different things, from live appearances, to the dramatically PR value of winning a well known event vs an online event.One gets ink, the other doesn't. One puts you one step higher on the ladder of greatest poker players.One doesn't.And it's not like, just because it's Sunday, there isn't something potentially more profitable going on.Didn't DN just finish playing in the big game this morning right before he went to church? Hell, he could've been in an online MTT.Plus, he's got to sleep sometime, and actually live his life, be with his family, go to church, respond to all of us clowns on this forum.Most of the time there is going to be something better to do with his time than play for hours in an online MTT.If you asked Daniel--as a poker player--which is the best bargain, and which would he rather do. Risk 10k to win 500k (WSOP Circuit Event). OR, he could risk $200 to win 225k(or thereabouts) in the 750k guarantee...I bet I know his answer.I wouldn't presume to know his answer, I am simply giving you my answer.Edit; This post was made before you made your last reply. If you don't get how 47 buy ins to a 500k prizepool is better than 1 buy in to a, say, 5 million dollar prizepool, well, I can't really help you.47 buy-ins to a 500k prizepool is not better than 1 buy-in to a 5 million dollar prizepool when you have won 700 buy-ins to 5 million-dollar prize pools in your tournament career, and you don't have time to play in 47 big online MTTs because there are more lucrative ways you can spend your time.Monty Link to post Share on other sites
InertGrudge 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 There's a lot of big words in this thread. And not a whole lot of mutual understanding.DD wins, for the record. Like always. Arguing with him is an exercise in futility. Link to post Share on other sites
DrawingDeadInDM 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 ..You still don't get it. I appreciate that you articulate your point of view so clearly and concisely, but, I think you're pretty myopic about some of your points. Is 10k a big deal to Negreanu and other big name pros? Not particularly. Do they still understand ROI? I certainly hope so.If you don't understand why 47 shots at a 200k+ payday is infinitely better than 1 shot a million dollar payday, well, sorry. That's about as dumbed down as I can get it. The PR argument holds absolutely no water--and I think it's fairly clear as to why. 8 hours on a Sunday night will not dramatically effect his availibility for television and other media appearances. There's a lot of big words in this thread. And not a whole lot of mutual understanding.DD wins, for the record. Like always. Arguing with him is an exercise in futility. Is this a compliment or a jab? Either way, I take it to mean that I'm pretty much a genius. Link to post Share on other sites
InertGrudge 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Is this a compliment or a jab? Either way, I take it to mean that I'm pretty much a genius.The former.You actually make sense. Few people do that.I feel like I compliment you too much in threads. I should really find some asinine topic and flame you for no reason. Because then I would be cool. Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 If you don't understand why 47 shots at a 200k+ payday is infinitely better than 1 shot a million dollar payday, well, sorry. That's about as dumbed down as I can get it.Argh, lol. If your argument is accurate, then all of the top poker players we know would be best served by playing in as many of the largest online poker tournaments as they could. That's just not what is happening.The reason 47 shots at a 200k+ payday is not infinitely better than 1 shot at a million dollar payday for these guys is because THEY DO NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN ONE OR THE OTHER. They can play in tournaments with multi-million dollar paydays all year long. They can go destroy high-limit games in Vegas and LA for 200k all year long. Then, when they have a spare night, they can sit down and play a big online tourney and have a great shot at a good payday. But it will never be their primary focus, and the reason it won't be their primary focus is because they can make more money in other ways and if they choose to make less money, then it is EV-Your argument is 100% correct for you. For me. For most everyone on these forums. It holds absolutely no water for top pros with multi-million dollar bankrolls, playing in huge games and huge tournaments.It's probably a safer bet, what you are talking about. A pro is a lot less likely to go bust. You're case has a lot less variance. But that's it.Monty Link to post Share on other sites
DrawingDeadInDM 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 The former.You actually make sense. Few people do that.I feel like I compliment you too much in threads. I should really find some asinine topic and flame you for no reason. Because then I would be cool.Well, I'm going to bed now. So, when I wake up, I hope to see your best work in this thread, or linked in this thread. Please don't let me down. But, be aware that I'll probably just respond to you with a dick joke, a shrug and scratch of my ass. Just sayin'.Later, man. Link to post Share on other sites
InertGrudge 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Well, I'm going to bed now. So, when I wake up, I hope to see your best work in this thread, or linked in this thread. Please don't let me down. But, be aware that I'll probably just respond to you with a dick joke, a shrug and scratch of my ass. Just sayin'.Later, man.This sounds like it would require effort.I don't do effort. Link to post Share on other sites
DrawingDeadInDM 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Argh, lol. If your argument is accurate, then all of the top poker players we know would be best served by playing in as many of the largest online poker tournaments as they could. That's just not what is happening.If they had the expectation of regularly finishing well into the money, then, yes. That's correct. The reason 47 shots at a 200k+ payday is not infinitely better than 1 shot at a million dollar payday for these guys is because THEY DO NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN ONE OR THE OTHER.Right. I DIDN'T SAY THEY HAD TO CHOOSE TO ONLY PLAY ONLINE. IF YOU'RE GOING TO TYPE IN CAPS AT ME, I REALLY HOPE YOU CAN AT LEAST DO SO INTELLIGENTLY. YOU IMPLLIED THAT THE MAJOR ONLINE TOURNAMENTS WERE -EV AND WERE NOT WORTH PLAYING. IN REALITY, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO IMPLIED THAT THEY SHOULD CHOOSE TO STICK TO LIVE GAMES. DO YOU SEE WHY? ..read critically. They can play in tournaments with multi-million dollar paydays all year long. What tournaments have multi million dollar paydays? Not prizepools, paydays. And, since they run all year long, please, name 12--one for each month, you know.They can go destroy high-limit games in Vegas and LA for 200k all year long.This is written poorly.Are you implying that they'd win 200k a session, most every session, through the course of a year? Or, that they could win 200k in a calendar year?Because either way you're wrong. There's very few pros who do book 200k sessions--about 10-15, I'd guess, and they rotate in and out of the 1k/2k, 2k/4k, 3k/6k and 4k/8k games. Then, when they have a spare night, they can sit down and play a big online tourney and have a great shot at a good payday. But it will never be their primary focus, and the reason it won't be their primary focus is because they can make more money in other ways and if they choose to make less money, then it is EV-Jesus Christ. You know how guys like Daniel, and Doyle, and Chip and all those guys got to where they are now? By understanding Expected Value and Return on Investment. IF you tell me I can take 10k, and win--at best--1.5 million dollars, I'll say, "Hmm, not bad, not bad at all." If you tell me that I can have 47 buy ins to the biggest prizepools offered every Sunday, for the same price, and 47 chances to cash, and 47 chances to win--we'll settle on 225k as a fun number--I will take the 47 chances to win 225k. It is dumb not to. And for the love of God, quit comparing cash games and tournaments. Everyone knows that cash games will inevitably make you more money if you are good at them. Jesus. I explain to you why the big Sunday tournaments are a better deal than the average 10k buy in, and you explain to me how he could make more money playing cash games. No shit? Your argument is 100% correct for you. For me. For most everyone on these forums. It holds absolutely no water for top pros with multi-million dollar bankrolls, playing in huge games and huge tournaments.This is just conjecture....and it is wrong.It's probably a safer bet, what you are talking about. A pro is a lot less likely to go bust. You're case has a lot less variance. But that's it.Everything italicised is amazingly wrong. I'm tired, but, if you'd like, I can explain tomorrow as to why it is. Link to post Share on other sites
pokerplayer24 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 There're a lot more players in a typical million dollar guaranteed tournament than there are in a typical WSOP or WPT event (not counting the main event, which is probably pretty close).And the players are a lot better.But it's obviously possible. I wouldnt expect him to take first any time soon though.You must not play the sunday guaranteed tourneys to often if you think the players are alot better online then at the WSOP or WPT.If DN started playing them he'd probly make money. Why? because the players are generally awful. People read way to far into DN's "reading ability" and all that. Just because he hasnt stepped into the highest NL and limit games on the net and killed them doesn't mean that hes not far better then the average online poker player and most likely one of the top players in any online tourney he enters. Link to post Share on other sites
pennohawk 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Not picking sides here, but one angle not given proper consideration is the value of a pro's time. 1 10k circuit event is about a 48 hour time commitment, 47 online MTT would be about 376 hours, that is a huge difference and probably the reason why more pros don't playthe big MTTs regularly. Link to post Share on other sites
pokerplayer24 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Not picking sides here, but one angle not given proper consideration is the value of a pro's time. 1 10k circuit event is about a 48 hour time commitment, 47 online MTT would be about 376 hours, that is a huge difference and probably the reason why more pros don't playthe big MTTs regularly.Indeed, that and playing the big sunday tourneys even with an awesome ROI you're not going to be making money at an hourly rate to make it anywhere near worthwhile.Sure the prizepools are huge, but the thing with the online tourneys is a pro is about as likely to win one that he enters as he is to win the main event since the fields are huge. Link to post Share on other sites
InertGrudge 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Indeed, that and playing the big sunday tourneys even with an awesome ROI you're not going to be making money at an hourly rate to make it anywhere near worthwhile.Sure the prizepools are huge, but the thing with the online tourneys is a pro is about as likely to win one that he enters as he is to win the main event since the fields are huge. For this statement to be factual, the following things need to happen: (1) The Main Event would have to stop growing; (2) All Sunday tournaments would have to have over 6k entries; (3) the Main Event would have to be played online; (4) there would have to be a direct correlation between the size of a field and ability of a player to win in said field.Most of those things are not true. Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 The reason you are wrong, are... well... manifold.Let's ignore the fact that there are intangibles. Let's throw those out. They, imho, effect the decision tremendously. But let's do away with them for now.Let's ignore the fact that there may be better ways to make money. That's fine. Different games, different stakes, different situations. Let's throw all of that out.That still leaves you with the fact that the top poker pro is not giving up anything by buying into a 10k buy-in tournament. He can buy into the 10k event 100 times over and still buy into 1000 "big online tournaments" and then use a $1000 bill as a kleenex. The determining factor is time, how much time does the poker player have in a single year.Let's start with the WSOP in June, let's, for fun ignore cancellations due to hurricanes.1. Main WSOP 45 events from June-August2. Grand CasinoTunica – Aug. 11-25, 2005 3. Harrah's Las Vegas – Sept. 6-16, 20054. Grand Casino Biloxi – CANCELED 5. Caesars Indiana– Oct. 19-Nov. 2, 20056. Paris/Bally's Las Vegas – Nov. 9-22, 2005 7. Showboat Atlantic City – Nov. 28-Dec. 9, 2005 8. Grand Casino Tunica – Jan. 4-27, 20069. Harrah's Atlantic City – Feb. 7-17, 2006 10. Harrah's Rincon San Diego– Feb. 26-March 8, 2006 11. Caesars Atlantic City – March 21-31, 2006 12. Caesars Palace Las Vegas – April 28-May 11, 200613. Harrah's New Orleans – May 18-28, 2006 14. Harrah's Lake Tahoe – June 6-16, 200615. Bicycle Casino's Legends of Poker 16. World Poker Open 17. PokerStar's Caribbean Poker Adventure 18. Borgata Poker Open 19. Grand Prix de Paris 20. Party Poker's Cruisin' Mexico 21. UltimateBet's Aruba Poker Classic 22. Commerce Casino's LA Poker Classic 23. Bellagio Five Diamond World Poker Classic24. Bay 101 Shooting Stars of Poker 25. Doyle Brunson North American Poker Championship 26. The Mirage Poker Showdown27. The Monaco eventOn top of these, and dozens of other events you have:28. Big-money invitationals (WSOP TOC, WPT, Monaco invitational, etc.)29. High-limit, public games in LV and LA and AC and Monaco and etc30. High-limit, private games all over the worldThat's well-over 100 big-buy-in events plus side games over the course of a year. And you have to set aside some time for poker superstars, and whatever the heck else you do.Tell me, where do you fit in 47 big online tournaments?Don't have time?Okay, let's say 47 big online poker tourneys is EV+ compared to playing in the above laundry list of venues.Why in the world aren't all of the top poker pros spending all of their time playing in big online poker tounreys? Why are they hating money by doing exactly what they are doing day-in and day-out?They are doing what they are doing because they are a bigger favorite to a live tourney field than they are to an online field, because they have better ways to make money than playing in dozens of online tournaments.A random poker professional could probably make a lot more money with your plan. A random poker professional is EV+ playing in 47 big online tourneys as opposed to buying into the WSOP ME.The 25 or 30 poker players we are talking about in this thread, by extension of the basic question regarding DN, are not.Monty Link to post Share on other sites
Loismustdie 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Alot of pros play in these tourneys. After reading two pages of this nonsense I have no idea how a person can't see that 47 shots at 250,000 is better than 1 shot at a million. Thats pretty dense. Link to post Share on other sites
nrs02004 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 If you asked Daniel--as a poker player--which is the best bargain, and which would he rather do. Risk 10k to win 500k (WSOP Circuit Event). OR, he could risk $200 to win 225k(or thereabouts) in the 750k guarantee...I bet I know his answer.Edit; This post was made before you made your last reply. If you don't get how 47 buy ins to a 500k prizepool is better than 1 buy in to a, say, 5 million dollar prizepool, well, I can't really help you.DD, this statement shows a deep misunderstanding of expected value, do you see why?Well, let me explain it, since I'm sure you will just make some smart@$$ comment like you have in the 900 brazillion other threads I've read in which you spend hours arguing over some technicality to show how much of a genius you are.He's risking 10k to win 500k, but probably has a much larger shot at winning it, because the field is much smaller. Whereas when he risks 200 to win 225k he is much more of a long shot because the field is much much larger.By your logic it's retarded to play a heads up freezeout because you're risking $100 to win $200, when you could play a $1 mtt, and risk $1 to win $200.PS. I don't have the time to waste getting in a heated argument with you over this. Think it over, and if you disagree... well that's good for you, but no one else cares. Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Alot of pros play in these tourneys. After reading two pages of this nonsense I have no idea how a person can't see that 47 shots at 250,000 is better than 1 shot at a million. Thats pretty dense. Someone just posted summing up the substantial portion of my response I was typing, so I shall refrain from an in-depth explanation for those that don't get it.Anyways, in addition to HUNDREDS of factors as to why focusing on "big online tournaments" is not EV+ for DN and any other of the top poker pros that we are talking about...DN is a bigger favorite to a smaller field to win comparable money.How much more simple can I get?Monty Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 Posting this much arguing such an obvious thing was EV- for me, I feel like a complete jackhole for doing so.lolMonty Link to post Share on other sites
goose 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Author Share Posted April 17, 2006 This thread has gone off on a tanget.My original, poorly phrased question, should have been:"Does DN enjoy anywhere close to as substantial an edge playing in these MTT online events as he does live? I know he has a great fundamental mathematical understanding of poker, but his main strength is postflop, not preflop, play, and these MTT's tend to be all about maximizing PF advantage in relation to the rapidly escalating blinds" Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 What do you think DN will say? Link to post Share on other sites
FullMontyM1 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 This thread has gone off on a tanget.My original, poorly phrased question, should have been:"Does DN enjoy anywhere close to as substantial an edge playing in these MTT online events as he does live? I know he has a great fundamental mathematical understanding of poker, but his main strength is postflop, not preflop, play, and these MTT's tend to be all about maximizing PF advantage in relation to the rapidly escalating blinds"He does not enjoy as substantial an edge for a wide variety of reasons, including the ones you mentioned, the lack of live tells, the lack of his well-known persona at the table which he can then manipulate, the blind-structure's prejudice for those players that catch premium hands early, etc.In a situation where catching two premium hands in the first 10 minutes and having both of those hands hold up puts you at a huge advantage to the rest of the field to cash, skill is just not going to play as much of a factor.All of this, plus the actual roi, plus a thousand intangible reasons is why top poker pros just aren't going to dedicate a lot of time to big online tourneys.Monty Link to post Share on other sites
XX44466XX 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 I'd say his chances are better than the OP's. Link to post Share on other sites
goose 0 Posted April 17, 2006 Author Share Posted April 17, 2006 I'd say his chances are better than the OP's. I'd agree Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now