dn and hellmuth

[Mattnxtc 0]

Ok so im sure im gonna get flamed for writing this but its what ive been kinda thinking...I know that the events are huge and so its very difficult to cash in any of them let alone a few of them...But i have noticed this about DN lately. It seems that he hasnt been playing up to what he has played at before. He has admitted a few times that his limit game isnt up to par with others right now and that he got lucky and out drew with the aq. After saying that, DN seems to have some new venture going on everyday it seems and he seems to be makin a killing off of it. Saying this is reminds me of what everybody said about Hellmuth not that long ago. That his play was suffering and this and that and it was because of all the extra non poker related things that he was doing.now its obviously + ev to be doing something that is guaranteed money so if anyone of us were in thier shoes we would probably do the same thing.. I just wonder if DN continues to not cash in these or in others if people are gonna start wondering if he is not focused on poker anymore and focused on the other ventures as hellmuth was accused of?

[gcirons 0]

Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raymer have proven this.

[zimmer4141 0]

I do agree with the OP to a certain extent. I think DN has a consolation in losing, which is that he usually gets to go play Barry in another HU match. He is much more focused on that than on the WSOP IMHO.

[Mr. Orange 0]

Give it another year. If he's still running this cold, then I'll agree with you, but lets not forget, it wasn't all that long ago since he was CRUSHING the WPT. You can't run red-hot forever. Give it time.

[dmoneypoker 0]

Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raaymer have proven this.

Exactly... let's say you are Phil Hellmuth, Johnny Chan, Negraneau or any other elite professional... there are going to be 6600 in the WSOP this year. If those guys are TEN times better than the average player which I don't think is exaggerating at all, then they are a mere 660 to 1 shot to win the event! Ridiculous. Let's say there are 100 excellent and/or elite tournament players in the world.. statistically we're lucky if ONE makes the final table. Look at 2004 and 2003... only big name to make either final table is Mr. Harrington who doesn't ever play cash or many tournaments, he's mostly into stock now and real estate.You might argue for Arieh and Krux for last year and for like Farha and david Grey from the year before... but did you consider them elite tournament players before they made those final tables, or even heard of them?Big tournaments for the most part belong to amateurs now... it's smart that guys who can make money elsewhere like Negraneu and Hellmuth do, especially Phil since he doesn't play many ring games... though supposedly he does during the WSOP.

[Mattnxtc 0]

like i said in the original post..i hope that it doesnt go that far...when hes focused he can crush most games and he showed that last year when he was focused on poker and only poker...I just hope he is able to get that focus back...and yeah he is extremely focused on the wsop but even with that..he isnt playin all that much right now and no matter how focused u are..u cant be as sharp as u would be if u were playin everyday

[jonnyhockey 0]

Do I think all the outside ventures are weighing on his mind? -Yes.Do I think it's costing him cashes at this year's WSOP? -No.Will some people accuse him of concentrating too much on un-poker related topics and hurting his game? -For sure.He obviously has a lot of stuff going on in his life right now, including an upcoming wedding, (I say upcoming, but have no idea when it is... does he even know when?) so people will naturally relate his not cashing as of yet, to the aforementioned endeavor's.I do feel, however, that he's mentally strong enough to stay focused on the task at hand, (beating his golden tee record.... oh I mean the WSOP) and the fact that he hasn't cashed yet is not unexpected at all. We all know about that dirty, dirty 'V' word. (Keep it clean, folks.)Anyways, he's young, and in his marketable prime, and if I were in his shoes, 1) I'd be doing the same thing, and 2) I'd be dunking on EDog left and right.Booya!

[dmoneypoker 0]

I do agree with the OP to a certain extent.  I think DN has a consolation in losing, which is that he usually gets to go play Barry in another HU match.  He is much more focused on that than on the WSOP IMHO.

That is true too. The opposite is true for Phil who believes he's going to win 3 bracelets this year. Ha! I really hope he does win one and also does well in the main event because he's my favorite player (tie with Ivey and Luske) but no way he or anyone else is going to win 3 ever again unless poker really cools down as fast as it's heated up.

[princeof56k 0]

Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raymer have proven this.

I understand what you saying but I tend to think the opposite. With so many inexperienced players, wouldnt it be easier for the pros to accumulate chips early and at least cash. While I agree its harder to win the whole thing, it might be easier to reach the money. BTW, if you do win, the payout is huge. I think its very possible to make a living at tournament poker, but you might need a larger bankroll these days.

[gcirons 0]

gcirons wrote:Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raymer have proven this.I understand what you saying but I tend to think the opposite. With so many inexperienced players, wouldnt it be easier for the pros to accumulate chips early and at least cash. While I agree its harder to win the whole thing, it might be easier to reach the money. BTW, if you do win, the payout is huge. I think its very possible to make a living at tournament poker, but you might need a larger bankroll these days.

I see your logic... But it is wrong. Yes more dead money is introduced into the tourneys, but that does not equal better odds. It just increases the cash winnings. Aand increases the amount of coin flips one has to win

[princeof56k 0]

I see your logic... But it is wrong. Yes more dead money is introduced into the tourneys, but that does not equal better odds. It just increases the cash winnings. Aand increases the amount of coin flips one has to win

My logic is also based on the assumption that the payout remains the same percentage wise.Suppose you have a tournament of 10 pros where only the top 10% cash (only the one winner). Well some player is at the bottom of those top ten and has to cut through all 9 better players to cash. Well if you add 90 rookies to that and still have the top 10% cash, the player that was previously at the bottom is now one of the top tier players. Wouldnt his chances of at least cashing be better? And if he were to reach the final table, wouldnt the chances of him winning be better since there will be some lucky rookies at the table? I'm not saying his chances are better for one particular tourny, but better over time.

[gcirons 0]

gcirons wrote:Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raymer have proven this.I understand what you saying but I tend to think the opposite. With so many inexperienced players, wouldnt it be easier for the pros to accumulate chips early and at least cash. While I agree its harder to win the whole thing, it might be easier to reach the money. BTW, if you do win, the payout is huge. I think its very possible to make a living at tournament poker, but you might need a larger bankroll these days.

His chances of taking dead money would be better. I agree with your point that more players will take home more than their buy in.... But the chances of Big Name Pros making a solid living with Tourney play is slim.

[capjim 0]

First off I think Daniel is doing what he wants to be doing. He travels, gives interviews, writes articles (and blogs), poker websites, and even has his own video game. Basically, he is one of the biggest ambassadors of the game. Which is great. Negreanu can still play just about any game (tournament or cash), and generally will get the best of it.IMO, Negreanu does these "side interests" to: (1) make $$, (2) have fun (who doesn't want to travel 1st class for free), and (3) be an ambassodor for the game. Ain't nothing wrong with that.Has his game suffered? Maybe. I honestly don't think his tournament game has suffered. He plays in every major tourney and has the time to prepare for them. Also, he has more to win in the big tourneys, because his endorsement value goes up as well as his bank account.His cash game may have suffered to an extent. Personally, I think Daniel could be a regular at the "big game" and be a winner, but he does not play enough there to do that. On a side note, I thought it was unfair for Daniel to critcize Ivey "he is in it just for the money". Ivey seems to be more "camera shy" than Daniel. Thus the lack of endorsements for Ivey. Daniel seems to be making quite a bit of money off his "endorsements". Ivey has his way, Daniel's his.

[Mattnxtc 0]

when did he criticize ivey?

[Mr Monkey 0]

if u look at most tournamets with a buy in of over $1500 their usually isnt more then 300 players in it. the WSOP is the exception. just look at cardplayer and check out previous tournaments. most tourney pros are broke so i dont think its a good way to make a living regardless of how many people are in the tournaments. obviously the more people the harder it is to win. the WSOP is a tourist attraction now . after the WSOP player levels on the tournament circuit will be normal again until next years WSOP.

[capjim 0]

when did he criticize ivey?

In his (Daniel's) profile.

[SuM827 0]

when did he criticize ivey?

In his (Daniel's) profile.

He wasn't criticising him at all, the original quote was:

He isn't in this game for the fame or noteriety, he is in it for the money all the way.

In case you forgot, poker is played for money. This was a compliment, if anything.

[MilesZS 0]

Yeah...Saying someone is 'just in it for the money' is such a silly criticism anyway. What professional is a professional for a major reason other than money? Love of the game? Then play it at home, buddy. The exception is possibly surgeons, as I advise they don't practice at home. Being "just in it for the money", to me, is only a criticism if you're spokesperson for some group that is less fortunate, and it's obvious that you don't care about said group. The Sally Struthers Way, maybe? If someone tries to talk to me about musicians and selling out and the like, I'm going to laugh. As an aspiring singer/songwriter (laugh if you will), I have no aspirations to sit on a small time label that can't promote my music when I have big-money execs knocking on my door, even if said label were good friends (in which case they should understand above all). Not that said situation will ever happen in my lifetime. Let me dream.

[elkang 0]

Do I think all the outside ventures are weighing on his mind? -Yes.Do I think it's costing him cashes at this year's WSOP? -No.

To be clear - I am agreeing with these two points. I don't care about anything else in this thread.Yeah, I did put DN as #3 in my fantasy team but that's really because his luck just cannot be that great - and John Juanda is due. Not the best argument, but hey I need something... In no way can I judge how all the pros and cons of DN's outside involvements balance out. I consider it negligible and if anything a plus. okay, maybe I do care about other points in this thread....I do think the biggest factor (outside of luck) is the fact that despite his intimidation, DN has a big target on his head. Until he gets the big stack, I believe that target is still tempting to many players. I have no proof, but I would love to gather data on this hypothesis. Regardless, I'd like to figure out what the top influences are on DN's winning (besides luck). It actually may be his breakfast choices. (that's a semi-joke).

[capjim 0]

when did he criticize ivey?

In his (Daniel's) profile.

He wasn't criticising him at all, the original quote was:

He isn't in this game for the fame or noteriety, he is in it for the money all the way.

In case you forgot, poker is played for money. This was a compliment, if anything.

OK, I think that is exactly what I said. Yes, poker is played for money. It is just that they (Daniel and Ivey) are going about it in two different ways. Daniel will probably make more money thru endorsements, so I don't think it is fair for him to say that (Ivey "is in it for the money").My point was Daniel is doing great things for the game (i.e. interviews, seminars etc.), and he is making money off of that. Nothing wrong there. But when he says that Ivey is "in it for the money all the way". It is like the pot calling the kettle black.Maybe I misunderstood .

[SapphireTiger 0]

Do I think all the outside ventures are weighing on his mind? -Yes.Do I think it's costing him cashes at this year's WSOP? -No.

To be clear - I am agreeing with these two points. I don't care about anything else in this thread.Yeah, I did put DN as #3 in my fantasy team but that's really because his luck just cannot be that great - and John Juanda is due. Not the best argument, but hey I need something... In no way can I judge how all the pros and cons of DN's outside involvements balance out. I consider it negligible and if anything a plus. okay, maybe I do care about other points in this thread....I do think the biggest factor (outside of luck) is the fact that despite his intimidation, DN has a big target on his head. Until he gets the big stack, I believe that target is still tempting to many players. I have no proof, but I would love to gather data on this hypothesis. Regardless, I'd like to figure out what the top influences are on DN's winning (besides luck). It actually may be his breakfast choices. (that's a semi-joke).

i agree wholeheartedly. now if only he would stop busting out on the bubble...

[mbreon 0]

Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raaymer have proven this.

Exactly... let's say you are Phil Hellmuth, Johnny Chan, Negraneau or any other elite professional... there are going to be 6600 in the WSOP this year. If those guys are TEN times better than the average player which I don't think is exaggerating at all, then they are a mere 660 to 1 shot to win the event! Ridiculous. Let's say there are 100 excellent and/or elite tournament players in the world.. statistically we're lucky if ONE makes the final table. Look at 2004 and 2003... only big name to make either final table is Mr. Harrington who doesn't ever play cash or many tournaments, he's mostly into stock now and real estate.You might argue for Arieh and Krux for last year and for like Farha and david Grey from the year before... but did you consider them elite tournament players before they made those final tables, or even heard of them?Big tournaments for the most part belong to amateurs now... it's smart that guys who can make money elsewhere like Negraneu and Hellmuth do, especially Phil since he doesn't play many ring games... though supposedly he does during the WSOP.

Sam Farha and David Grey were at least semi-well known before the `03 final table , since they are both high-stakes cash game players, and their names have been thrown around poker circles. I had never heard of David Williams or Josh Arieh before the `04 final table, though I certainly know who they are now. I had heard of Raymer from his posts at 2 +2.....

[SuM827 0]

when did he criticize ivey?

In his (Daniel's) profile.

He wasn't criticising him at all, the original quote was:

He isn't in this game for the fame or noteriety, he is in it for the money all the way.

In case you forgot, poker is played for money. This was a compliment, if anything.

OK, I think that is exactly what I said. Yes, poker is played for money. It is just that they (Daniel and Ivey) are going about it in two different ways. Daniel will probably make more money thru endorsements, so I don't think it is fair for him to say that (Ivey "is in it for the money").My point was Daniel is doing great things for the game (i.e. interviews, seminars etc.), and he is making money off of that. Nothing wrong there. But when he says that Ivey is "in it for the money all the way". It is like the pot calling the kettle black.Maybe I misunderstood .

Well, you did misunderstand. When someone says that Ivey plays poker for the money, not for the notoriety, or the fame, he's saying that he doesn't care about those things, so you'll never see him grandstanding for the cameras, that he's a down to earth guy. There are pros (Lederer for one) that were once cash game pros, and started focusing on tournaments (for less money) once the TV got involved so they could capitalize on the celebrity. Phil did the opposite because cash games are where the money is. Like tupac said: "All I want is money, f*ck the fame I'm a simple man" And I disagree that the endorsements make DN more money than Ivey. I think DN once scoffed at the idea the Greenstein made more money than Ivey, so I don't think he'd ever claim to be in the same stratosphere as far as earnings. And DN has what, like 3 endorsement deals? Also, I think it's important to note that of the few thousand people that read that profile, you're the only one that thought Ivey was being criticized, just a thought.

[iveyfan30 0]

first off , we all know dn has a ton of outside intrests that take him away from the tables as of late...saying that doesnt hurt his play is wrong imo...anytime you dedicate less of your time to your craft, your performance is gonna suffer...that being said, i dont think its a problem yet...it's not like he is playing as bad as hellmuth had been playing...i dont even think he has been playing all that bad, its more like he just hasnt been as hot as he was before...the problem is not many ppl can keep that pace ...i dont blame dn for taking advantage of the bussiness of poker while the iron is hot..hes not "selling out" , he's doing it in a classy way...i would like to see him try to focus a little more on playing again to silence the critics.....

[dms26 3]

Okay, here is my opinion.It is really, really hard these days to make a living playing Tourney Poker. Too many people playing in the contest. It is hard to consitantly play solid Poker...win coin flips.. and still make final tables. Gone are the days of 300 players in WOSP when Unger was the champ. 6000 plus is too hard for the best to beat the Odds. Moneymaker and Raymer have proven this.

I understand what you saying but I tend to think the opposite. With so many inexperienced players, wouldnt it be easier for the pros to accumulate chips early and at least cash. While I agree its harder to win the whole thing, it might be easier to reach the money. BTW, if you do win, the payout is huge. I think its very possible to make a living at tournament poker, but you might need a larger bankroll these days.

They don't play to try and cash, if that was the main goal it probably would be easier. But with fields in the 1000's you have to take more chances and win coin flips and take a few risks in order to win. Winning one tourney pays better than 75-100 times when you barely cash.