are dn's heads up matches mostly luck?

[speedz99 145]

Anyone else notice that Daniel's heads up matches always seem to be decided by who is getting a big rush of good cards? I take this to mean that most of the players DN is up against are fairly even with him, no more than 5% better or worse (in terms of being a favorite).So if the players are of basically even skill and the winner is usually decided by who gets the cards, then what's the point? Isn't 500k a lot of money to risk on what basically comes down to a coinflip?

[speedz99 145]

Sorry to bump this, and it's the only time I'll do it.Anyone have thoughts on this?

[Rocketwadster 0]

So, was the Heads-Up Championship luck for Phil Hellmuth? Was the final table when it got down to heads up all luck for the evetual winner? Really silly post if you ask me... :wink:

[jtwoms 0]

If you look through his blogs after playing Joe Cassidy and Mimi Tran he comments on how the limit matches are somewhat of a crapshoot and the person that won just got the best cards, so it really isn't that dumb of a post.

[ajs510 122]

Fundamentally, Limit poker (which all of the challenge matches played so far have been limit) is more about card-catching and less about technique and reading skills than No-Limit. It's tougher to bluff a player out of a marginal hand when they can simply call the $8000 and see what happens on the next street. If DN was allowed to bet $100,000 on a stone or semi bluff, it would be a tougher call. So from that point of view, you're right, he (or she) who catches the most cards at the right time, wins...If DN was playing any schlub who comes along with $100,000 to burn, his skill would trump the luck factor. He's not playing schlubs, he's playing established pros who happen to be catching more cards than he is. There's a reason no one has challenged him at No-Limit Lowball or Hold'Em yet, although I would imagine it will happen soon...This gibes with Lederer's argument against the whole "Challenge Match" idea (search the forum). If DN was choosing the game, he would be a much bigger favorite than in the current format where the opponent is allowed to choose the game he/she feels most comfortable against DN in. Basically, DN is being well compensated by the Wynn to take things in stride, he's no fool risking his bankroll to stoke his ego.

[Rocketwadster 0]

If you look through his blogs after playing Joe Cassidy and Mimi Tran he comments on how the limit matches are somewhat of a crapshoot and the person that won just got the best cards, so it really isn't that dumb of a post.

I still think it is a silly post, with the reason being that these heads-up matches start with both players having the same number of chips, and the blinds are relatively small. We are not talking about all-in fests near the conclusion due to the escalating blinds (a la some freeroll tournament), we are talking about a structure that should allow for the better player to win over the long haul. While I agree that in a lot of limit games, there is an ellement of crap-shootiness that exists, but that exists in all card games, dice games, etc. :wink:

[1profiler 0]

Is it mentioned anywhere what the blind structure is for these heads up matches? And no I don't think this was a dumb post at all. Think about it, this is like playing one session of poker and luck plays a huge factor when only looking at one poker outing. Atleast in these limit matches I could see a semi-pro fcp'er up 3-0 against Daniel at this point. Now if they were to play say 1000 heads up matches DN would win a significantly higher percentage. If only looking at a few matches it is impossible to tell who is the better player.

[semaj550 0]

Well I think DN vs Barry in NL or PL hold'em is going to be VERY interesting. Barry plays the highest cash games going but from what I've been able to gather a lot of it isn't NL. The 4k/8k mixed involves some NL and PL but I believe it's always played with a "cap" of 100k which is only 12.5 BB. If they play NL with no cap (just table stakes) and the game could be decided by a single hand it will be VERY interesting indeed. I definately think some matches, other than limit, will go more to suggesting who the better players are. That's not to say that limit can't do it but at the top level of limit players these guys are playing virutally flawless poker anyway and it comes down much more to cards. I believe there is no such thing as a flawless NL game so there are definately WAY more chances to outplay your opponent, no matter how good either of you is.

[TheIceman05 0]

If you look through his blogs after playing Joe Cassidy and Mimi Tran he comments on how the limit matches are somewhat of a crapshoot and the person that won just got the best cards, so it really isn't that dumb of a post.

I still think it is a silly post, with the reason being that these heads-up matches start with both players having the same number of chips, and the blinds are relatively small. We are not talking about all-in fests near the conclusion due to the escalating blinds (a la some freeroll tournament), we are talking about a structure that should allow for the better player to win over the long haul. While I agree that in a lot of limit games, there is an ellement of crap-shootiness that exists, but that exists in all card games, dice games, etc. :wink:

(emphasis mine)Exactly. The poster's point was that in one match they aren't even approaching the long-haul, so it's going to come down to who catches the most breaks.Ice

[ajs510 122]

The last I heard about the challenge matches with BG, they were going to play each of the games listed for $500,000 each. That seems to have changed, as DN is talking about the next challenge being for Limit Stud again. For 1profiler - The blind structure is agreed upon before play commences on a case-by-case / game-by-game basis. Both players have a say in what the blinds are, you can find pretty good write ups of how things have gone in each challenge in the Blog and Daniel in 2005 sections.

[Governator 54]

I would definitly say luck has a lot to do with the games that have been played up to date. It's simply not as easy to push people off a hand in limit. Most Pro's are almost equally as good in comparison to each other when it comes to the skill level involved in limit poker. If the odds are closer to 50/50 in terms of the outcome in limit... why would a pro want to play for $100k-$500k if they are a 40/60 underdog?... I can only see these matches being limit.If the "buy-in" was lower I think there would be atleast some no limit matches.