A Special One Time Offer!!!

[Daniel Negreanu]

If you act now and your name is Mason Malmuth or David Sklansky you can take advantage of an astounding 10% rebate on your money in a heads up match against Daniel Negreanu!

Rush to your phones gentlemen as this is a limited time offer for memebers only!!! Not only will you receive 10% of your money back, you'll also get to choose how much you want to risk! (Between $100,000 to $500,000)

Not only that, you will ALSO get to pick your game of choice! That's right, for a limited time only you will receive:

-a 10% rebate on your money
-your choice of stakes (min. 100K)
-your choice of game

An offer too good too pass up? Absolutely! Mr.Negreanu has already given away $200,000 to lucky winner David Oppenheim anf you Mr.Sklansky or Mr.Malmuth could be our next big winner!

Remember to act now as this is a limited time offer. An offer so good it's IMPOSSIBLE to refuse!!!

Mr.Malmuth has said it himself, "Daniel will be an underdog in almost all of the matches he plays." You heard it here folks, Mr.Malmuth has stepped out and made his claim... is he willing to back it up with some greenbacks? Inquiring minds want to know. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[xorbie]

I, for one, love it.

[Yeti]

You really seem to have something against David and Mason, which I find somewhat bizarre.

Of course Mason is entitled that claim. It's likely the majority of matches you will be playing players at games they are better than you at. As you can see, this has already begun.

[Paradigm]

Man, everybody is so quick to judge on this board.

[West]

When Mason said he believes you'd be an underdog in most of the matches you play, he clearly wasn't referring to the odds of you playing himself or David S. He's just speculating on you're likely opposition. So I think you're going to have a tough time goading one of them into one of your matches.

How many players in the world wouldn't be an underdog, if they figured to be taking on, one by one, some of the best players in the world, each at their best games? We're not talking Seattle Supersonics/San Antonio Spurs type dog - more like Spurs - Miami Heat (who's the dog?)

David I believe has said that he isn't too comfortable playing for 100k or 50k, and I think he said he'd want to receive 1.25 to 1 and play Stud/8 or better (blinds?) to take you on. I don't think 10 to 9 will do it for him.

Also, I believe he's said that he wouldn't feel right playing at the Wynn right now, since the Bellagio is currently hosting a trial of a game he created.

Even when he picks the game, it's not like David feels he has anything but a small edge over you. I think his only real interest in the idea is if you are willing to lay him enough odds to make risking that amount of money worth it to him. And since he clearly doesn't relish risking that amount of money on a "coin flip", you're basically going to have to make a suckers bet to get him to play you heads up for big money.

[tylerdurden]

What are you, Sklansky's agent or something?

[WSOPwinner10]

yeah Daniel!

[West]

well no...but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night!

[trying2learn]

considering the turn-out last night, these challenges will continue. i'd be suprised if steve w isn't helping to back some (if not all) of these endeavors. they will continue to pack the place if david o. v daniel can draw that well...just imagine what more recognizable names will do.

[TheShootah]

This is a really funny post, although I would like to see the match regardless.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
well no...but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night!

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Actually I thought your first post was dead on.

[TomCollins]

You idiots actually believe its Daniel, thats whats so funny.

[jeffraider]

[ QUOTE ]
You idiots actually believe its Daniel, thats whats so funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is Daniel.

[Shaman]

No its not. But its his personal assistant. Same thing, I guess.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
considering the turn-out last night, these challenges will continue. i'd be suprised if steve w isn't helping to back some (if not all) of these endeavors. they will continue to pack the place if david o. v daniel can draw that well...just imagine what more recognizable names will do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would Wynn put up hundreds of thousands of dollars to get (a few dozen?) people into his casino to watch the game. It's not like the match is getting any publicity for Wynn.

[memphis_aces]

I gotta agree with dynasty here.... although I wouldn't be surprised to see them eating SOME of Daniel's action. Enough to make it +EV for daniel. This will provide some pretty good exposure for the new room... the kind that it's hard for money to buy.

[trying2learn]

go read paul phillips post in his journal today. it's no coincidence that the poker room had its first HUGE night last night. not to mention the fact that daniel could win these things...i think it's incredibly naive to think that wynn isn't helping or behind this in some way.

maybe my post about half or most was a little out of line, but i promise you - it's worth it to steve for these things to go down and to continue...win or lose for dan.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
I gotta agree with dynasty here.... although I wouldn't be surprised to see them eating SOME of Daniel's action. Enough to make it +EV for daniel. This will provide some pretty good exposure for the new room... the kind that it's hard for money to buy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is doing anything significant for Wynn. Perhaps I'm unaware of this getting publicity other than in poker forums.

For the record, Daniel has gone on record saying that he is putting up 100% of the money he is playing with.

Daniel Negreanu:

For the record: ALL of the money is being put up me me, 100%

from Daniel's blog (http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-forums/viewtopic.php?t=11498&postdays=0&postorder=asc&sta rt=90)

You have to scroll down a bit to see Daniel's comment.

[trying2learn]

you do realize that danny is a paid employee (of sorts) don't you?

and yes, the buzz that this creates locally is much bigger than just internet chat rooms and poker forums.

dan is a poker ambassador (i believe is his title)...his job is to get people into the poker room...he is paid a fee for this, with an understanding that he won't play elsewhere live - except for tournaments.

this challenge makes him a VERY valuable employee.

[David Sklansky]

It is important to understand that the terms I said I would agree to were not actually made as a challenge to Daniel. Rather they were to counter any perception that I consider myself a substantial underdog to the ultra high players and would avoid them at any cost. Keep in mind I would not take 11-10 on a 100K as a 52% shot.

But again for the record, if Daniel is that anxious to play me in a way that the Bellagio won't particularly mind, I will go on record as saying that I will risk my own money in the following three ways:

Hi Lo Regular getting 33,000 to 30,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 23,500 to 20,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 50,000 to 40,000 odds.

To get up to his 100,000 threshhold, someone would have to take a piece of me or the odds would have to be sweetened.

[Sightless]

this is fun -_-

[greg nice]

perhaps Mason will man up then..

[BeerMoney]

Can I be part of a team that helps make this happen?

[TomHimself]

[ QUOTE ]
You idiots actually believe its Daniel, thats whats so funny.

[/ QUOTE ]
it is daniel you idiot /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[TomCollins]

Wow, I didn't expect that Daniel would sound like that much of a retard.

Anyway, still seems pretty gullible. I should create a new name "God", and post on the psychology forum to prove David wrong.

[1p0kerb0y]

[ QUOTE ]

Why would Wynn put up hundreds of thousands of dollars to get (a few dozen?) people into his casino to watch the game. It's not like the match is getting any publicity for Wynn.


[/ QUOTE ]

How about Wynn trying to get the big games permanently running in the Wynn instead of the Bellagio. This would definitely generate more traffic.

[CrackerZack]

I love this post in an unnatural way. David's response couldn't have been predicted better by Gary Carson. If I thought myself the foremost authority on anything poker related, I'd pony up for this, but I'm just a mediocre limit player that drinks too much and gets lucky. Good luck to you Daniel and your oversized testes.

[Mason Malmuth]

Daniel:

Your challenge is silly. Heads-up poker is not something I do or have ever done. So I agree that you would probably have a small edge against me. Does that make you feel better?

But I do stand on my previous statement that most of those who do take you up on your offer will be a favorite over you. So if you're so anxious to lay me 11-to-10, let me bet on some of those players with those odds.

By the way, I'm literally crushed with publishing work, Harrington on Hold 'em, Volume II is top priority at the moment. It will be followed by other important books including Theory and Practice of No Limit Hold 'em by David Sklansky and Ed Miller. So I'll only be in Wynn occasionally the next couple of months.

Mason

[BadBoyBenny]

[ QUOTE ]
For the record: ALL of the money is being put up me me, 100%


[/ QUOTE ]

They said the same thing about Win Ben Stein's Money

[dsm]

The guantlet (and matching purse) has been thrown down, you must except!

http://tri-stateantiques.com/tns/7976hand_small.jpg http://tri-stateantiques.com/tns/5722beadtn_small.jpg

[dsm]

http://www.superworlds.com/sand.JPG

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
But I do stand on my previous statement that most of those who do take you up on your offer will be a favorite over you. So if you're so anxious to lay me 11-to-10, let me bet on some of those players with those odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you stake Sklansky then? Or stake the amount he isn't willing to gamble with. The person who follows a non-self-weighting strategy shoots big when he knows he has the best of it.

I know i've oversimplified this, but wanted to run the idea by you.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, I'm literally crushed with publishing work

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes!

[csuf_gambler]

mr. negrenu would crush all these h0es

[-Skeme-]

http://img241.echo.cx/img241/9729/permielnegreanu6oh.jpg

Daniel Baldwin

[SoftcoreRevolt]

Well now we know why he can't stake David, he's trapped under a mountain of manuscripts.

WHY DOESN'T SOMEONE HELP HIM?

And how'd he get internet access.

[HelloGoodbye]

Great to see not much has changed with you over the years.

[dogmeat]

Jeez, Mason, I don't think Daniel's challenge is silly. He is offering to play you because he considers it a good bet. Pretty simple. Maybe he wanted to see if you were willing to say he would be a slight favorite, and you were big enough to do that. Good for you. Nothing wrong with passing on what you consider a bad bet. However, saying you are too busy to play for an evening, that's pushing it.

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
However, saying you are too busy to play for an evening, that's pushing it.

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Hm, not really so much...

Let's say that he believes that he would in fact be a 1% favorite or 2% favorite against Dan N in a game of MM's choice, and that he's willing to play him for 100k as his maximum. That means that the bet would have EV (ignoring the cashback incentive being offered) of somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000. Something tells me that being sure to get his book out on time is worth quite a bit more than that to him at the moment. Possibly even on a "per day" basis, until the book is to the printer. I'm not sure exactly what MM stands to make from the release of the upcoming book, but if it's less than $60,000 or so I'd be pretty shocked.

citanul

[TransientR]

Daniel,

Why don't you yourself find someone to take a piece of David or Mason (maybe Steve Wynn)? Since neither of them want to play for 100K even with the spot. Of course since David says he won't play at the Wynn out of respect for the Bellagio, and Mason says he is too busy, even that probably wouldn't work.

I do find that these two renowned poker theoreticians talking like heads-up poker is some kind of an alien thing to them to strain credulity.

Best of luck with your future contests.

Frank

[Daniel Negreanu]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel,

Why don't you yourself find someone to take a piece of David or Mason (maybe Steve Wynn)? Since neither of them want to play for 100K even with the spot. Of course since David says he won't play at the Wynn out of respect for the Bellagio, and Mason says he is too busy, even that probably wouldn't work.

I do find that these two renowned poker theoreticians talking like heads-up poker is some kind of an alien thing to them to strain credulity.

Best of luck with your future contests.

Frank

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, that's a tough sell my friend. If they kind find ayone to stake them I don't see how I could?

[That guy]

Daniel,

Awesome post...

One thing though, it would really help us understand the sudden interest in heads-up challenges if you could somehow describe the nature of your agreement with Steve Wynn.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Revolt:

I do have a lot of help. But the typesetting and final proofreading must be done by me.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi citanul:

Actually it's even stronger than you suggest. We have already purchased a promotion in Borders that begins on June 20. If we don't have the book in time, and it's going to be close, we lose the amount of this purchase and it is much more than the figure you suggest.

Best wishes,
Mason

[cwsiggy]

It's quite simple - the big game (2k/4k; 4k/8k or whatever in this range) has not moved from Bellagio!!!!!! At least not yet...

[TransientR]

True...

But I don't think David or Mason are actively looking for backers. They basically don't want to Tango at the Wynn with you /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Frank

[TransientR]

Mason,

Why can't you farm out some of the raw proofreading? I'm sure there are poker playing proofreaders who would spot both spelling/grammatical errors and poker mistakes.

Frank

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi TransientR:

A lot of the proof reading has to do with exactly the way I want the final type setting to look. That just can't be farmed out.

Best wishes,
Mason

[HelloGoodbye]

Don't feel bad, not counting tournamanets, that's more than Daniel.

[HelloGoodbye]

Daniel, why not offer to play them for a sum they can afford instead of waving your money around in dick waving contest? Are you really that shallow?

[SoftcoreRevolt]

Are you not aware of kiddie pools and why you are supposed to get out of them?

Daniel has gotten out of the kiddie pool and is making moves, you can't expect him to only fill up his brand new Wynn pool with the lesser amount of water tha... yeah, I suck at analogies.

[TheTruthSpeaks]

[ QUOTE ]
It is important to understand that the terms I said I would agree to were not actually made as a challenge to Daniel. Rather they were to counter any perception that I consider myself a substantial underdog to the ultra high players and would avoid them at any cost. Keep in mind I would not take 11-10 on a 100K as a 52% shot.

But again for the record, if Daniel is that anxious to play me in a way that the Bellagio won't particularly mind, I will go on record as saying that I will risk my own money in the following three ways:

Hi Lo Regular getting 33,000 to 30,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 23,500 to 20,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 50,000 to 40,000 odds.

To get up to his 100,000 threshhold, someone would have to take a piece of me or the odds would have to be sweetened.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering the fact that you choose the game, your insistance on "odds" is embarrassing at best. Well, given your huge ego.

[TheTruthSpeaks]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel:

By the way, I'm literally crushed with publishing work, Harrington on Hold 'em, Volume II is top priority at the moment. It will be followed by other important books including Theory and Practice of No Limit Hold 'em by David Sklansky and Ed Miller. So I'll only be in Wynn occasionally the next couple of months.

Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Shameless promotion at its best

[steaknshake925]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you not aware of kiddie pools and why you are supposed to get out of them?


[/ QUOTE ]

awesome.

[TransientR]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi TransientR:

A lot of the proof reading has to do with exactly the way I want the final type setting to look. That just can't be farmed out.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, I thought that might be the reason. I've done my share of proofreading, so I understand the work/concentration involved.

I, like many others, are looking forward to this book. I'm sure I won't be disappointed.

Frank

[That guy]

Considering the fact that you choose the game, your insistance on "odds" is embarrassing at best. Well, given your huge ego.

you donkey... its dumb to gamble without an overlay. this is not about ego, this is about money. read the Kelly Criterion post on other thread...

[Roybert]

Daniel, you strike me as a great poker player and an even better person, but seriously drop the ego.

I truly admire and respect you, but you've been acting like a total weenie lately.

A HUGE fan,
Brian.

[Roybert]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel, why not offer to play them for a sum they can afford instead of waving your money around in dick waving contest? Are you really that shallow?

[/ QUOTE ]

[David Sklansky]

Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[TheTruthSpeaks]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that you have nothing to gain indirectly from beating Danny in this match?

[TheTruthSpeaks]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel,

Awesome post...

One thing though, it would really help us understand the sudden interest in heads-up challenges if you could somehow describe the nature of your agreement with Steve Wynn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure Daniel would like nothing more than to discuss his business relationship with you.

[lastchance]

You get to pick the damn game you want to play. You decide, for all intents and purposes, how many times you want to play. This should be a huge +EV situation that, if you're very good at shorthanded play in your specific game, you should pick it up immediately.

That said, if you're not good enough to have a large edge of Negreanu, or even a moderate one in one particular game he shows, then pass it up. How good would you have to be in a game to take this bet? Negreanu should get at least the best 3-4 players from most games, I think it's very +EV for the top 20 or so, unless Negreanu is very good at the particular game you're good at.

[SCfuji]

you are all focusing on the wrong heads up matches. no offense to daniel (he is an awesome player and i think it is great that he is challenging players to these matches - it will only improve one's skill in poker) but the real action is

HERE (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2392044&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1).

[TheCroShow]

where were you daniel? i was at the Wynn tonight (saturday) and had 200k i didn't want anymore, too bad so sad!

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that you have nothing to gain indirectly from beating Danny in this match?

[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably no more than he has to lose if he were to lose...

[Suited_Up]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

What the hell is the Wynn Factor and why are you making things up. Just stand up and play. Or stop spewing bad excuses all day long.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

But why won't you stake David?

Also, David keeps mentioning that Daniel has extra incentive because the Wynn is somehow playing a part in this. Don't you think if David wins there could be promotional benefits for you and your products? This is espeacially true if you choose to bank off of it. I'm sure things would be made public through forums and things like CardPlayer magazine. You could even have WPT commentators talking about the match when discussing something about Daniel or David while they are on T.V.

On the other hand, if David loses, the consequences are mild to none (aside from losing the money put up).

So if David is truly a favorite AND is getting better odds AND has the extra promotional benefit AND you are willing to bet against Daniel at those odds, why don't you stake him?

I assume you already haven't answered this for a reason. Probably because you wouldn't bet that much against Daniel. Although, why don't you split the bet with other two plus two authors or some of your wealthy gambling friends. Surely they are looking for large bets where they can have the best of it, and you have a juicy one awaiting. I'm sure you know people who bet around or more than 10-20K on sports games or other forms of gambling. Why wouldn't they put down the same kind of money down for this +EV oppurtunity?

Lastly, would you play Daniel post June 20 or whenever your schedual frees up?

Just wondering if these haven't been overlooked.

Thanks.

[Smoothcall]

Daniel,

When did you realize you were this good? Just curious why you think you are so much better than most players in the world. Not trying to insult. Just wondering what makes you believe this. Is there a reason other than that you think you are? I mean have you been beating the best in the world in live games for years and this is how you came to this conclusion? I mean maybe you are that good. I don't know. Just wondering what this belief stems from.

According to Barry G. there are 5 top players. He doesn't name you as one of them. And says anybody else that steps into our game(the big game) is a sucker and some of which are even drawing dead. So according to him you are not a great player. And Howard Lederer backs him up saying Barry's claims are mostly correct. I know you 2 have had words. But is what he says true or is he just trying to irritate you and he thinks your great?

[Hold'me]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel,

When did you realize you were this good? Just curious why you think you are so much better than most players in the world. Not trying to insult. Just wondering what makes you believe this. Is there a reason other than that you think you are? I mean have you been beating the best in the world in live games for years and this is how you came to this conclusion? I mean maybe you are that good. I don't know. Just wondering what this belief stems from.

According to Barry G. there are 5 top players. He doesn't name you as one of them. And says anybody else that steps into our game(the big game) is a sucker and some of which are even drawing dead. So according to him you are not a great player. And Howard Lederer backs him up saying Barry's claims are mostly correct. I know you 2 have had words. But is what he says true or is he just trying to irritate you and he thinks your great?

[/ QUOTE ]
Stfu and stop trying to instigate sh*t. If I knew you in real life, you would get snuffed in a heartbeat.

[pancakes]

Do you really think Daniel cares about his "indirect" price, c'mon

[trying2learn]

yes - and you show your ignorance when you post something like this.

an "indirect" price at these levels is substantial...and we don't even know how substantial it is...it could be silly money.

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel, why not offer to play them for a sum they can afford instead of waving your money around in dick waving contest? Are you really that shallow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for summing up Daniel's ridiculous ego crusade perfectly.

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind I would not take 11-10 on a 100K as a 52% shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

So there are typical situations where someone should turn down +EV events?

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, I'm literally crushed with publishing work

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes!

[/ QUOTE ]

lol I can just imagine stacks of HOH II piled all over top of Mason's body, and only his feet sticking out a la the evil witch that gets crushed by the house in Wizard of Oz.

[TheShootah]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel,

When did you realize you were this good? Just curious why you think you are so much better than most players in the world. Not trying to insult. Just wondering what makes you believe this. Is there a reason other than that you think you are? I mean have you been beating the best in the world in live games for years and this is how you came to this conclusion? I mean maybe you are that good. I don't know. Just wondering what this belief stems from.

According to Barry G. there are 5 top players. He doesn't name you as one of them. And says anybody else that steps into our game(the big game) is a sucker and some of which are even drawing dead. So according to him you are not a great player. And Howard Lederer backs him up saying Barry's claims are mostly correct. I know you 2 have had words. But is what he says true or is he just trying to irritate you and he thinks your great?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why won't you shut up? Honestly...all you try to do is stir [censored] up in the forums....

[pancakes]

I was referring to this specific match between David or Mason, I know it is substantial in all of the heads up matches, but it is clear that Daniel is foaming at the mouth for a chance to play them and that is all he really cares about, and do not call me ignorant

[trying2learn]

but you said (implied) that dan doesn't care about the indirect price, which is dead wrong.

if dan thinks he's a favorite heads up in a particular HU game against these two guys - AND he is paid a wage by Steve Wynn to sit and do it - how do you figure that doesn't factor into his desire to play the match?

he's getting an incredible price at that point - indirectly.

[maryfield48]

I must be missing something. MM says DN will be a dog in most of the matches in his heads-up challenge, because he is allowing his opponents to pick the game. In insurance terms, his opponents get to select against DN.

How is a personal challenge from DN to MM or DS an answer to MM's position? Did MM claim DN would be a dog to either himself or DS or any other specific player? If so, I missed it.

There are one or two large egos on display in this thread. It's not a pretty sight.

[That guy]

So there are typical situations where someone should turn down +EV events?

simply pass on small edges to pursue bigger edges... would you bet $100k to win $110k on a coin weighted 52% in your favor??? f-no

[Vincent Lepore]

I want a front row seat to watch this event! Certainly the details can be worked out so this can happen. If David wants backers I bet there are enough people in Bellagio that will buy a piece of him to get the money together. Daniel is a good sport for making this offer. David needs to do what is necessary to make this happen. The WPT should be more than willing to be involved in a match(s)like this. I can't believe that the Bellagio would have a problem with a match like this going on at Wynn's or vice a versa. There is no such thing as bad publicity. If Bellagio has a problem then Sklansky would just not mention anything about Bellagio. Even if Daniel has a hidden edge by playing at Wynn's, so what?

We need a unbiased recorder so that we can get a blow by blow description of what goes down. It cannot be just a one session event. Must be 2 out of three. Come on guys work this out! And in this corner...!

Vince

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
you are all focusing on the wrong heads up matches. no offense to daniel (he is an awesome player and i think it is great that he is challenging players to these matches - it will only improve one's skill in poker) but the real action is

HERE (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2392044&amp;page=0&amp;view=c ollapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=1).

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Bring it DN. $5 buy-in!

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Equal:

Our initial printing of HOH: Volume II should weigh approximately 30 tons. Definitely enough to crush many things.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Smoothcall]

What is your problem? Are you threatening my life? What did i do to you? This is a little scary. Dude relax i'm just discussing. Daniel is the one that made the post calling out David and Mason. But i cannot ask him a simple quesiton of why he thinks he's great? I didnt even insult him. I just genuinely asked where this stems from?

[Smoothcall]

I'm trying to stir the forum? Danielis the one trying to stir it. He's calling David and Mason out and mocking them. Why don't you tell him to stfu? Why me? Becasue you live through Daniel's eyes?

[TheShootah]

Lol, I don't think he was mocking anyone. He simply extended a challenge. This was a very typical post by you. Basically, you drop a bunch of stupid remarks down, and want to start arguments. It seems to me like you think you are the hottest [censored] ever to hit this planet. It seems to me like you think you are the greatest 15/30 / Overall player ever. How do I live through Daniel's eyes? You are looking way too in to this one tiger.

[Smoothcall]

You don't think he was mocking them? You must read differently than everybody else. Read it again. He even says it would be a tough sell to get anyone to back them(David or Mason). You dont think that is Daniel mocking them? Insulting them? Please. You would just rather insult me for no reason. As what he did was insulting. I wasn't i being insulting. I was asking a legitimate quesiton. And would still like to hear the answer. But i doubt i will get one. You are either afraid of daniel or in love with him. That is why you decide to insult me for no reason. Instead of insulting daniel. The one who is being and insulting and stirring things up.

Oh and why am i not allowed to think i'm a good player. But Daniel can think he is one of the best in the world because he thinks so? Interesting that i get flack for it. And he gets praised for it. What a world we live in!

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Equal:

Our initial printing of HOH: Volume II should weigh approximately 30 tons. Definitely enough to crush many things.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you Mason. Shipping costs are going to be a real b1tch. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[David Sklansky]

"Do you really think Daniel cares about his "indirect" price, c'mon"

So you think he is willing to play the best player in the world at that players specialty for $500,000 simply because he wants to gamble? Or is it that he thinks he is better at all of the eight games he mentioned than anybody else.?

[grandgnu]

C'mon Daniel. Trying to drum up media attention for the Wynn to compete against already established casinos? You're like Joe Izuzu popping out from under a car.

I liked you better when you weren't such a businessman, although I do understand you need to do what's best for your financially, and couldn't care less what the public thinks of you.

Mason or Sklansky, I'll buy 100 bucks worth of either of you guys, w00t!

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll buy 100 bucks worth of either of you guys, w00t!

[/ QUOTE ]

See, I bet we could raise the dough right here on 2 + 2. I'm in!

Vince

[Vincent Lepore]

So what! How will playing at Wynn's Casino affect athe outcome. Have you asked Bellagio if the even care? come on work it out. Make it happen. You have always told us how smart you are. Working this out should be a piece of cake. Maybe even a "piece de resitance".

vince

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Our initial printing of HOH: Volume II should weigh approximately 30 tons. Definitely enough to crush many things.


[/ QUOTE ]

Charmaine can't be happy about this.

[LBJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind I would not take 11-10 on a 100K as a 52% shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

So there are typical situations where someone should turn down +EV events?

[/ QUOTE ]

If someone offered to flip a coin, where if it were heads they'd give you 3x the money of whatever you own, but it if were tails they'd take away everything you own and you'd live in poverty....would you do it?

Clearly it's +EV, but too risky to gamble with.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
It is important to understand that the terms I said I would agree to were not actually made as a challenge to Daniel. Rather they were to counter any perception that I consider myself a substantial underdog to the ultra high players and would avoid them at any cost. Keep in mind I would not take 11-10 on a 100K as a 52% shot.

But again for the record, if Daniel is that anxious to play me in a way that the Bellagio won't particularly mind, I will go on record as saying that I will risk my own money in the following three ways:

Hi Lo Regular getting 33,000 to 30,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 23,500 to 20,000 odds

Hi Lo 8/B getting 50,000 to 40,000 odds.

To get up to his 100,000 threshhold, someone would have to take a piece of me or the odds would have to be sweetened.

[/ QUOTE ]

and why won't you play him at the Wynn? if you're gonna spout that, "i don't wanna give them [the Wynn] any extra publicity than they need or step on the Bellagio's toes", that's sounds like an excuse and a copout. unless you have a specific contract with the Bellagio with a clause in it saying you CAN'T play at another casino, then what's the problem? when it all boils down to it:
[ QUOTE ]
IT'S ALL PUBLICITY!

[/ QUOTE ]
regardless of where you play or what odds he lays you, if you win, you're gonna get it. if Daniel wins he's gonna get it.

[NCAces]

In a previous thread David stated that he didn't want to do anything that might be adverse to Bellagio because of his relationship with them and their implemetation of his new game, All-in Poker (or some similar named game). If Daniel's purpose here is to attract top names to the Wynn (why else), that is a valid concern and a business reason for David to not do it.

NCAces

[David Sklansky]

Look. Daniel offered me 100K to 90K odds. If I simply turned it down, people might believe that I felt like I had a much smaller chance to win than I do. But in fact what it would take me to play is just a bit more than that. 50K to 40K. The fact that I can't take the chance of alienating the Bellagio is a side issue to me. But to Daniel it understandably is not. Actually I would play that game at the Wynn if here wasn't a lot of hoopla to it. Or we could play elsewhere.

Forty thousand dollars isn't meaningless to Daniel. On the other hand he doesn't need a big edge to bet that much. If he thought he was a 7-5 favorite to beat me he would play me anywhere. Conversely the fact that I am willing to take 50-40 proves that I must feel like I'm at least about even with him. Making those two points (via my "counter offer" and the fact he declined) is really all I was trying to do.

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel offered me 100K to 90K odds

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
it would take me to play is just a bit more than that. 50K to 40K.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excuse me but at which school was it that you said that you studied math? If there was a SAT question that asked: Is 50-40 a bit more than 100-90? Would you answer yes or no? Come on David.

Vince

[Stork]

50:40 is laying better odds for than 100:90.

[dogmeat]

Alright, I stand corrected. Hope you get a vacation soon.

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
50:40 is laying better odds for than 100:90.

[/ QUOTE ]

Duh! A lot better not a bit better.

Vince

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
In a previous thread David stated that he didn't want to do anything that might be adverse to Bellagio because of his relationship with them and their implemetation of his new game, All-in Poker (or some similar named game). If Daniel's purpose here is to attract top names to the Wynn (why else), that is a valid concern and a business reason for David to not do it.

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]

if that's the case, then the odds that Daniel will lay him should'nt matter. if you're worried about your business relationship with the Bellagio, you should'nt even be entertaining what odds he can lay you, much less, entertaining him [Daniel] at all.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
Look. Daniel offered me 100K to 90K odds. If I simply turned it down, people might believe that I felt like I had a much smaller chance to win than I do. But in fact what it would take me to play is just a bit more than that. 50K to 40K. The fact that I can't take the chance of alienating the Bellagio is a side issue to me. But to Daniel it understandably is not. Actually I would play that game at the Wynn if here wasn't a lot of hoopla to it. Or we could play elsewhere.

Forty thousand dollars isn't meaningless to Daniel. On the other hand he doesn't need a big edge to bet that much. If he thought he was a 7-5 favorite to beat me he would play me anywhere. Conversely the fact that I am willing to take 50-40 proves that I must feel like I'm at least about even with him. Making those two points (via my "counter offer" and the fact he declined) is really all I was trying to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

so if you can't take a chance alienating the Bellagio, then why would you even be entertaining odds that would be favorable for you to play? apparently, your issues with the Bellagio seem to be more than just a side issue . something is not making sense here.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
50:40 is laying better odds for than 100:90.

[/ QUOTE ]

and yet, there's the side issue of alienating the Bellagio. which is more important:

1. the odds that Daniel lays you to play at the Wynn?

2. or alienating the good 'ole folks at the Bellagio?

either you're a man of Business ["me and the Bellagio got something good going that's safely $EV"] and won't even entertain Daniel or you're a man of gamble and ego who will play Daniel at the Wynn and enjoy taking his money in the process.

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't think he was mocking them? You must read differently than everybody else. Read it again. He even says it would be a tough sell to get anyone to back them(David or Mason). You dont think that is Daniel mocking them? Insulting them? Please. You would just rather insult me for no reason. As what he did was insulting. I wasn't i being insulting. I was asking a legitimate quesiton. And would still like to hear the answer. But i doubt i will get one. You are either afraid of daniel or in love with him. That is why you decide to insult me for no reason. Instead of insulting daniel. The one who is being and insulting and stirring things up.

Oh and why am i not allowed to think i'm a good player. But Daniel can think he is one of the best in the world because he thinks so? Interesting that i get flack for it. And he gets praised for it. What a world we live in!

[/ QUOTE ]

I've gotta tell you, I don't know who among the three of them is the best poker player, but I do know this (and I say this knowing full well the risk of sounding like a complete 2+2 kissass): if it weren't for David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth, I wouldn't even be playing poker today. If it weren't for Daniel Negreanu....my copy of Super System 2 would weigh a bit less, I suppose.

So poker acumen aside, that's what I think on a personal level.

[ QUOTE ]
You are either afraid of daniel or in love with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't it be both? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You don't think he was mocking them? You must read differently than everybody else. Read it again. He even says it would be a tough sell to get anyone to back them(David or Mason). You dont think that is Daniel mocking them? Insulting them? Please. You would just rather insult me for no reason. As what he did was insulting. I wasn't i being insulting. I was asking a legitimate quesiton. And would still like to hear the answer. But i doubt i will get one. You are either afraid of daniel or in love with him. That is why you decide to insult me for no reason. Instead of insulting daniel. The one who is being and insulting and stirring things up.

Oh and why am i not allowed to think i'm a good player. But Daniel can think he is one of the best in the world because he thinks so? Interesting that i get flack for it. And he gets praised for it. What a world we live in!

[/ QUOTE ]

I've gotta tell you, I don't know who among the three of them is the best poker player, but I do know this (and I say this knowing full well the risk of sounding like a complete 2+2 kissass): if it weren't for David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth, I wouldn't even be playing poker today. If it weren't for Daniel Negreanu....my copy of Super System 2 would weigh a bit less, I suppose.

So poker acumen aside, that's what I think on a personal level.

[ QUOTE ]
You are either afraid of daniel or in love with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't it be both? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
(and I say this knowing full well the risk of sounding like a complete 2+2 kissass): if it weren't for David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth, I wouldn't even be playing poker today.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm seriously trying to understand what point you're trying to make aside from:

[ QUOTE ]
" this is something that is best suited sent in a PM but i guess i'm in the mood to risk sounding like a 2+2 kissass, so instead, i guess i'll post it".

[/ QUOTE ]

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm seriously trying to understand what point you're trying to make aside from:

[ QUOTE ]
" this is something that is best suited sent in a PM but i guess i'm in the mood to risk sounding like a 2+2 kissass, so instead, i guess i'll post it".

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

The point I was trying to make was that Negreanu bags on Sklansky and Malmuth all the time, when regardless of who among them is the best player, they have contributed infinitely more to the world of poker than he most likely ever will.

But I don't know why I'm posting this, since I'm fairly certain that you could have done about three seconds' worth of thought to figure out my point; rather I think you were just in the mood to sound like a retard. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

EDIT: I guess UBB doesn't like the word "[censored]", although I don't know how else to describe someone who makes a post essentially saying "Your post seems to have zero content, so here's a reply with a post which undoubtedly has zero content!" - I think the substitute description I decided on is pretty accurate, though. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm seriously trying to understand what point you're trying to make aside from:

[ QUOTE ]
" this is something that is best suited sent in a PM but i guess i'm in the mood to risk sounding like a 2+2 kissass, so instead, i guess i'll post it".

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

The point I was trying to make was that Negreanu bags on Sklansky and Malmuth all the time, when regardless of who among them is the best player, they have contributed infinitely more to the world of poker than he most likely ever will.

But I don't know why I'm posting this, since I'm fairly certain that you could have done about three seconds' worth of thought to figure out my point; rather I think you were just in the mood to sound like a retard. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

EDIT: I guess UBB doesn't like the word "[censored]", although I don't know how else to describe someone who makes a post essentially saying "Your post seems to have zero content, so here's a reply with a post which undoubtedly has zero content!" - I think the substitute description I decided on is pretty accurate, though. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
(and I say this knowing full well the risk of sounding like a complete 2+2 kissass): if it weren't for David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth, I wouldn't even be playing poker today.

[/ QUOTE ]

talk about zero content, who cares? i bought TOP but what does that have to do with what D &amp; M have done for poker as opposed to DN? nothing. that also has nothing to do with any headsup match they play. that's exactly why i posed my question, and yet, you talk about being a retard?

[ QUOTE ]
note to David Sklansky: please be sure to send a complimentary copy of Theory and Practice of No Limit , Greg Raymer's swirly glasses, and a 2+2 logoed Dunce Cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm seriously trying to understand what point you're trying to make aside from:

[ QUOTE ]
" this is something that is best suited sent in a PM but i guess i'm in the mood to risk sounding like a 2+2 kissass, so instead, i guess i'll post it".

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

The point I was trying to make was that Negreanu bags on Sklansky and Malmuth all the time, when regardless of who among them is the best player, they have contributed infinitely more to the world of poker than he most likely ever will.

But I don't know why I'm posting this, since I'm fairly certain that you could have done about three seconds' worth of thought to figure out my point; rather I think you were just in the mood to sound like a retard. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

EDIT: I guess UBB doesn't like the word "[censored]", although I don't know how else to describe someone who makes a post essentially saying "Your post seems to have zero content, so here's a reply with a post which undoubtedly has zero content!" - I think the substitute description I decided on is pretty accurate, though. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The point I was trying to make was

[/ QUOTE ]

is that what that smell was? Bullchit!

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
i bought TOP but what does that have to do with what D &amp; M have done for poker as opposed to DN?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that supposed to be serious?

"[Theory of Poker] is a must have for any poker library. It teaches you all you need to know about pot odds and general theory. " - Daniel Negreanu

"The Triple Draw Section of Super System 2 is a must have for any poker library."

Oh wait, nobody said that.

And yeah, I posted that just to suck up to Sklansky and Malmuth.

Ok so that was sarcastic. But this isn't: I'm fairly certain that you have some sort of learning disability.

[Vincent Lepore]

Please stop all the bickering. It's not nice.

vince

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i bought TOP but what does that have to do with what D &amp; M have done for poker as opposed to DN?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that supposed to be serious?

"[Theory of Poker] is a must have for any poker library. It teaches you all you need to know about pot odds and general theory. " - Daniel Negreanu

"The Triple Draw Section of Super System 2 is a must have for any poker library."

Oh wait, nobody said that.

And yeah, I posted that just to suck up to Sklansky and Malmuth.

Ok so that was sarcastic. But this isn't: I'm fairly certain that you have some sort of learning disability.

[/ QUOTE ]

you may now check your tracking number via the UPS website. Thank you.

Best Wishes,

David and Mason

[TroutMaskReplica]

[ QUOTE ]
Please stop all the bickering. It's not nice.

vince

[/ QUOTE ]

the voice of reason.

[TheShootah]

Yeah, that is classic, considering good ole' Vince started a thread about a fellow poster earlier today. What a class act.

[uw_madtown]

Yet another small-time online player who only knows the "big pros" via TV and whatnot. During his WSOP run last year I grew to respect DN quite a bit and would have listed him as one of the players I most respected. He seemed to have fun at the tables without acting like a wank while in the spotlight.

Lately, he's acting like a wank. And I understand that the opinions of some small-time poker players probably is meaningless to DN -- and that there are larger financial issues powering some of this wankery. But, you know. I hate seeing a public figure I respect act like a wank.

Oh, and FWIW, unless someone backs DS for whatever reason, a match between the two is not going to happen. DN has the money to wave around (see above mentioned wankery) and DS is unlikely to take any bet for significant stakes unless he is:

A) a considerable favorite -- even picking the game, DS is likely only a slight favorite vs. DN at best

or

B) getting considerable odds on his money


So unless someone takes DS's action to mitigate his risk, or they play at less significant stakes (chance is almost nil) this match just isn't going to happen. Nor should it, if DS stands by his writings; taking up this challenge at stakes significant to his BR, without either a significant edge or good odds, would be primarily about ego. And that's the worst reason to risk significant money.

I say they do a play money freeze out on Poker Mountain!

[b00gal00ga]

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-forums/viewtopic.php?t=1184

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
If you act now and your name is Mason Malmuth or David Sklansky you can take advantage of an astounding 10% rebate on your money in a heads up match against Daniel Negreanu!

Rush to your phones gentlemen as this is a limited time offer for memebers only!!! Not only will you receive 10% of your money back, you'll also get to choose how much you want to risk! (Between $100,000 to $500,000)

Not only that, you will ALSO get to pick your game of choice! That's right, for a limited time only you will receive:

-a 10% rebate on your money
-your choice of stakes (min. 100K)
-your choice of game

An offer too good too pass up? Absolutely! Mr.Negreanu has already given away $200,000 to lucky winner David Oppenheim anf you Mr.Sklansky or Mr.Malmuth could be our next big winner!

Remember to act now as this is a limited time offer. An offer so good it's IMPOSSIBLE to refuse!!!

Mr.Malmuth has said it himself, "Daniel will be an underdog in almost all of the matches he plays." You heard it here folks, Mr.Malmuth has stepped out and made his claim... is he willing to back it up with some greenbacks? Inquiring minds want to know. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty classless Daniel.

[David Sklansky]

Why are you so confused? I will take a 20% rebate on a $50,000 freezeout. 500-1000 stakes, hundred dollar ante, two hundred dollar bring in Eight or Better stud game. He offered me a ten percent rebate which I am turning down. We can play anywhere, even at the Wynn. But if it is at the Wynn it can't be with a lot of publicity.

The above statement can be translated into my opinion that the chances I win is above 48% but less than 53%. It was not meant to be a serious counter offer since I don't think Daniel would be anxious to play this game with me, even giving me a ten percent rebate, if it doesn't have extra benefits for the Wynn card room.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Daniel conceiving this promotion to help the Wynn. What is wrong however is to make innaccurate implications about someone turning him down. He gains from an even bet. Others don't. I am rather sure that Daniel would not win in the long run giving me a ten or even five percent rebate in typical 8/B stud freezouts. But if Iwere to simply proclaim that, the comment would be met with skepticism. My "counter offer" was made to prove I'm not lying. After all there is some chance that Daniel might accept, if only to call my bluff.

[LinusKS]

I would take it to mean you thought he (Daniel) was more than 10% better, but less than 20%.

[gaming_mouse]

The above statement can be translated into my opinion that the chances I win is above 48% but less than 53%.

4/9 = 44.4%
10/21 = 53%

What am I missing?

[BlueBear]

You're missing a decent calculator.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
The above statement can be translated into my opinion that the chances I win is above 48% but less than 53%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone explain how he arrives at these figures?

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
You're missing a decent calculator.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I shouldn't have bought it on discount....

But after correcting I'm still confused:

4/9=44.4%
10/21=47.6%

Doesn't this mean that David believes his chances of winning are between these two numbers?

[rwesty]

I don't think you can actually come up with the 48-53% figures from the above paragraph. He is just stating what he thinks his odds are. Maybe?

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can actually come up with the 48-53% figures from the above paragraph. He is just stating what he thinks his odds are. Maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was saying that the one thing logically implied the other. It's a simple conversion, too. I don't know what's wrong with what I did. I hope someone will point it out.

[SCfuji]

why dont the two of you just take off your pants and compare the length of your members? itll be quicker, no money is exchanged, but the end result is the same...

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Why don't the two of you just take off your pants and compare the length of your members?

[/ QUOTE ]

Word is Daniel's already circumsized and cannot offer the ten percent rebate.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Daniel [Negreanu] conceiving this promotion to help the Wynn. He gains from an even bet. Others don't. My "counter offer" was made to prove I'm not lying. After all there is some chance that Daniel might accept, if only to call my bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is already gaining by all this pre-flop action.

Seeing a flop would be even better.

(Where are the poker agents ? People are left to negotiate messily through such opportune situations.)

[italianstang]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can actually come up with the 48-53% figures from the above paragraph. He is just stating what he thinks his odds are. Maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was saying that the one thing logically implied the other. It's a simple conversion, too. I don't know what's wrong with what I did. I hope someone will point it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't really matter if he will win 48 times out of a hundred or whatever, all he has to do is beat him one time.

[JoshuaD]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this mean that David believes his chances of winning are between these two numbers?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure it's a function of D.S's bankroll as well.

[WillMagic]

A thought just occurred to me.

Getting 11:10 odds on Sklansky in a 7-stud hi-lo no qualifier vs DN is definitely a good bet, no?

So why not set up something like the corporation to put together the cash? Sklansky said he would be willing to play at 33,000 - 30,000. 2+2 as a whole could put up the rest of the cash and get 77,000 - 70,000.

Granted, the logistics of this could be pretty frightening. But a good bet is a good bet, and if we spread the risk around we could do very well.

Thoughts?

Will

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Will:

We can't do anything on Two Plus Two that can be construed as if we are taking bets. That could get us into legal trouble and I think that what you are proposing would come under this category.

Sorry,

mason

[Matt Ruff]

Daniel,

Forget David and Mason. Here's the guy you need to beat:

http://home.att.net/~storytellers/pokermonkey.jpg

Personally trained by Ed Miller, of course.

-- M. Ruff

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're missing a decent calculator.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I shouldn't have bought it on discount....

But after correcting I'm still confused:

4/9=44.4%
10/21=47.6%

Doesn't this mean that David believes his chances of winning are between these two numbers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Notice that both of those numbers are 5% less than his range. So that is probably the cushion that Sklansky would require want to play against Daniel.

[Vincent Lepore]

I know that guy. He plays 15-30 at Bellagio.

Vince

[DaVoice]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
considering the turn-out last night, these challenges will continue. i'd be suprised if steve w isn't helping to back some (if not all) of these endeavors. they will continue to pack the place if david o. v daniel can draw that well...just imagine what more recognizable names will do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would Wynn put up hundreds of thousands of dollars to get (a few dozen?) people into his casino to watch the game. It's not like the match is getting any publicity for Wynn.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't truly be serious can you? I'm not disputing Daniel's claim that he is staking himself, but to think that this is getting no publicity is ridiculous. I heard mention of it on FOX NEWS. This isn't just a "Poker Thing" this is a WYNN thing. When Wynn does anything, it gets attention.

[keats]

Bo Jackson in tecmo superbowl. Best player in a football game...ever.

[Easy E]

I haven't read all of this thread, having come here via RGP.

Does anyone else think this is an imposter?

[Pov]

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone else think this is an imposter?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It is definitely him or an authorized surrogate using his account.

[Pov]

[ QUOTE ]
Bo Jackson in tecmo superbowl. Best player in a football game...ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not much you can do to stop a 75 speed in average condition.

It doesn't take much to scare off the chickenhawks Mason and David. Those guys like to talk about Noble prizes and such, but when it comes to actually putting some real money on the line they are nowhere to be found.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't take much to scare off the chickenhawks Mason and David. Those guys like to talk about Noble prizes and such, but when it comes to actually putting some real money on the line they are nowhere to be found.

[/ QUOTE ]

Running scared on their own forum. Its a shame.

[memphis_aces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't take much to scare off the chickenhawks Mason and David. Those guys like to talk about Noble prizes and such, but when it comes to actually putting some real money on the line they are nowhere to be found.

[/ QUOTE ]

Running scared on their own forum. Its a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly... Next thing you know Sklansky will want to risk 25 to win 50, and it's got to be in his basement with the blinds drawn.

Sad sad sad

http://www.gravity-interactive.com/sklansky_chick.jpg

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can actually come up with the 48-53% figures from the above paragraph. He is just stating what he thinks his odds are. Maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he was saying that the one thing logically implied the other. It's a simple conversion, too. I don't know what's wrong with what I did. I hope someone will point it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't really matter if he will win 48 times out of a hundred or whatever, all he has to do is beat him one time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you familiar with the term, EV? It doesn't appear so.

[David Sklansky]

"Those guys like to talk about Noble prizes and such, but when it comes to actually putting some real money on the line they are nowhere to be found."

Show me a Nobel prize winnier who Daniel wouldn't gladly lay 1.25 against.

[David Sklansky]

Goad me all you want but keep in mind that the only things that matter to me regarding Daniel or other champion player are:

1. Am I close to him headup depite my lack of experience?

My "counter offer" proves I believe I am.

2. Am I as good or better in a game that I actually have more experience?

His turning me down playing Hi Lo Regualar would indicate that.

3. Could I beat him in weird versions of poker that neither of us ever played where the rules were not told to us until right before we started? Games like threes become wild if you have four hearts in your hand.

I'd play a match like that where the games constantly changed and were made up by an unbiased third party. And to me, being the best at that is more important than being number one in games after much practice.

4. Suppose we both took four randomly chosen mid high IQ people who never played poker and gave them one hundred hours of lessons. After which they played a ring game at any of the eight games Daniel mentioned. That game lasted a month. I'd lay an easy 2-1 my four beat his four. This is another attribute I would prefer having as opposed to being the best headup player.

I could list other things but I think that would be counter productive. This is just to explain why the fact that I need a little price to play one of the best headup players in the world, isn't going to bruise my ego or have any relevance on the integrity of my writings.

[Zygote]

How well do you know his (DN) quality of play?

[yoshi_yoshi]

[ QUOTE ]

thread (http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-forums/viewtopic.php?t=1184)


[/ QUOTE ]

I just read through that thread - suitedBullets sounds really familiar...

[Dawk]

In the far flung chance, that option #4 ever really goes down?

Put me on that student list!

I've been playing a few months, but can still play &amp; act like I know absolutely nothing about poker? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

I'm going to be in Vegas a few months this summer too, it sounds like a really good solution to this to me! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[uw_madtown]

[ QUOTE ]
3. Could I beat him in weird versions of poker that neither of us ever played where the rules were not told to us until right before we started?

4. ... I'd lay an easy 2-1 my four beat his four.

[/ QUOTE ]

People are going to find these two things really odd and claim they're unrelated / meaningless. They're clearly not.

David's ego is primarily banked in two areas -- his belief that he has a better theoretical understanding of poker than anyone on the planet (well, nearly anyone), and his position as a "poker guru" or "mentor" to other players. The made up games would require a deep theoretical knowledge to quickly adapt to the new strange rules, creating an optimal strategy on the spot. As for David's challenge as a teacher, well, I honestly hope Negreanu wouldn't dispute that DS is a better teacher.

Of course, as Negreanu's last blog following the Mimi Tran match indicates, he supposedly isn't doing these to prove he's the best -- he just wants to "gamboool." A statement I find a bit disingenuous, given his calling out of DS and MM. His OP in this thread reeks of ego and macho BS, and I cannot imagine why he would call anyone specifically out (and lay them odds, no less) if he just wants to gambool.

Further, calling out someone like DS to gambool seems kind of ridiculous, because clearly someone like DS requires either an edge or odds before he'd play -- not because he is or is not a dog in the match, but because he's not going to take a bet he thinks might be -EV (add in what DS's time is worth and it takes a pretty lopsided bet for this to make sense for him).

One final thing -- David, I'm curious why you so explicitly relish this role as "mentor" or "guru" that you've developed over the last 20-30 years. It seems -EV to be sharing your wealth of knowledge, and opens you up to attacks like this. Seems like something worth posting about in Psychology (as opposed to the massive amounts of religion posts /images/graemlins/wink.gif).

[Matt Ruff]

[ QUOTE ]
3. Could I beat him in weird versions of poker that neither of us ever played where the rules were not told to us until right before we started? Games like threes become wild if you have four hearts in your hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are there any odd poker variants -- like wild card games -- that you actually have experience with? Just curious.

-- M. Ruff

[TransientR]

[ QUOTE ]

3. Could I beat him in weird versions of poker that neither of us ever played where the rules were not told to us until right before we started? Games like threes become wild if you have four hearts in your hand.

I'd play a match like that where the games constantly changed and were made up by an unbiased third party. And to me, being the best at that is more important than being number one in games after much practice.


[/ QUOTE ]

So being better at goofy versions of poker that nobody plays is more important to you than being better than Daniel at the games that the vast majority of poker players play...LMAO.

I suppose you could beat Negreanu at Darts if the board kept moving around or Tiddlewinks with both eyes closed or whatever..



Frank /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[NCAces]

Yeah, that is what David was saying ... I want to be the champion of goofy games. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Use your head for a minute to think why David might have said what he said?

NCAces

[Sully]

David;

You already have our respect (or most of ours, anyway). I just don't understand why you don't either:

1. Stay above all of this, and just say that you aren't interested.
2. Admit that your forte is books and teaching, not High Limit Heads-Up Showdowns

You've been very successful doing what you do. Keep doing it. These sophomoric excuses and explanations are way below the image I, and many others, have of you.

You have used some really ridiculous reasons to explain your lack of interest, but this last one took the cake. Apparently, you would now like to play made-up poker???(assuming the location and odds are correct, I'm sure.)

In short, do your thing. You seem to do it well. Don't lose all the respect that you have earned by talking circles around something as stupid and juvenille as this.

[David Sklansky]

"David;

You already have our respect (or most of ours, anyway). I just don't understand why you don't either:

1. Stay above all of this, and just say that you aren't interested.
2. Admit that your forte is books and teaching, not High Limit Heads-Up Showdowns"

I can't do that because I have made it very clear that in my opinion, you cannot be a great poker teacher without being a very very good player. If I just ignored Daniel's offer, (as players like Brunson Farha, Reese, Ivey etc appear to be doing, probably because tiny edges don't interest them), my readers might assume I feel significantly below him and would never think of playing him. So I felt it necessary to specify what odds I would take to give me the edge I needed. Or which games I felt I was enough of a favorite to need no odds. (Not just Hi Lo Regular or goofy games by the way.) The important thing to understand is that I felt I had to specify what matches I would play to seperate myself from the likes of Jones, Brier, McEvoy, Ciafone and even Cooke and Caro all of whom would be big underdogs to Daniel.

The comment about goofy games was simply to point out that I UNDERSTAND poker better than the few players who play a smidgeon better than me (I am playing and beating 300-600 everyday). And there is a reason for that which I won't spell out. I brought the subject up only to refute the morons out there (who I would gladly play head up even) who don't understand that the ability to understand poker extremely well (while playing it very slightly less well) should be more coveted than its converse.

[Malagant]

Mr Sklansky wrote:

-snip- my readers might assume I feel significantly below him and would never think of playing him. So I felt it necessary to specify what odds I would take to give me the edge I needed. /snip

Right there is your problem, if you are as good of a pokerplayer as you think you are, you wouldnt need all this.

Either play 5 games or something of your choice for x-amount of money or simply let it go. Stop doing posts where you try get an edge here or and edge there. As I see it the rules are fairly simple, Mr Negrenau even lets you pick the games.

The only thing here thats could be seen as a "bother" to you, would be the fact that the games are being played at the Wynn, when you have business interests at another casino. (I believe you stated something to this effect in another thread, something about a new game you designed and they are testing at Bellagio)

Thats all there is to it, ofcourse if I were you (which I am sure you are glad I aint) I would have made the move first and granted Daniel the better odds only later to be basking in the glory of my 1 gazillion fans who are chanting my name victoriously over the crowded strip of Las Vegas.

Emperor Sklansky indeed.

/M

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
I would play to seperate myself from the likes of Jones, Brier, McEvoy, Ciafone and even Cooke and Caro all of whom would be big underdogs to Daniel.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would take Brier over Negreanu in heads up limit Holdem.

Vince

[David Sklansky]

"I would take Brier over Negreanu in heads up limit Holdem."

Vince

Are you saying that because he has recently done extensive game theoretic analysis of the head up game? He is a math major so it's possible. Otherwise Jim has little chance. I believe in fact that the best game for Daniel, if he is facing ring game pros who have little experience playing junkie hands, is in fact limit holdem.

[Vincent Lepore]

If Jim Brier, at his age, has set his mind on obtaining a PHD in math you had best believe he is fully capable of learning the math of Heads-up holdem play to literaly beat the pants off of Negreanu. Heads-up holdem (limit) is a perfect medium (poker) for combinatorial anlaysis and game theory (two subjects dear to my heart of which I know nothing). You uderstate the power of mathematics in Heads-up play. Negreanu has no chance agianst you in most poker games and you know it! I love the "University of Alberta" comment. Nice touch. Not a prayer does the boy have. If I were wealthy I'd put you up in a heart beat!

Vince

[David Sklansky]

Keep writing stuff like that and Daniel will soon challenge YOU, offering 10-1 like he did Gary Carson.

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep writing stuff like that and Daniel will soon challenge YOU, offering 10-1 like he did Gary Carson.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he does will you be my mentor like Barry was to Mimi? And put up the 10 or 20k of course. I'm a poor man, as you know. BTW - I think I'd take Eddie over Daniel also.

Vince

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
Right there is your problem, if you are as good of a pokerplayer as you think you are, you wouldnt need all this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? What "all this" are you talking about? David already said he doesn't want to just flip coins for money, and that even if he's a slight favorite he's not putting up $100K on a 52% proposition.

[ QUOTE ]
Stop doing posts where you try get an edge here or and edge there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, heaven forbid a professional poker player look for an edge in a poker game.

[NoRiverRats]

I think I see the problem;

David "Darth Vader" Sklansky - "Daniel, I am your faaather"

Daniel "Luke Skywalker" Negreanu - "Nooooooooooo" as he runs screaming from the Wynn poker room.

[toots]

Yes, in general, I think this is just a funny thread.

It seems there's a lot of sentiment that just because DN stepped up and "double dog dared" DS to a game, that DS is a total pansy if he doesn't accept the dare.

This is schoolyard at best.

I don't know about the rest of you, but $100,000 is serious money to just about anyone except the ultra rich. Maybe DN is willing to gamble with money like that, but that doesn't mean everyone has to. Even to a multimillionaire, 100K is a lot of money. Even a person who has a slight edge would be hesitant to take this risk, because it just seems silly. Sort of like putting $100K on black on the roulette wheel. Really exciting if you're an action junkie, but even if the house rejiggered the payout to eliminate their edge, giving you an even bet (black would pay 20:18), it'd still strike me as a silly thing to do.

Winning poker is about exploiting an edge over the long run. Sitting down to a single $100K heads-up with a player in the same ballpark skill-wise doesn't really fit that. The former's using an edge to make money, while the latter is just gamboooling.

And in the realm of getting up and slamming penises on the table, if DN and DS went to this heads-up match, and DS won, would that seriously change any minds about who is the better player? Just about everyone's gonna tell you that a single heads up match between two players is just going to tell you who won the match. Someone can always get lucky, and with closely matched players, it may well be luck that's the major deciding factor.

[skp]

[ QUOTE ]
The important thing to understand is that I felt I had to specify what matches I would play to seperate myself from the likes of Jones, Brier, McEvoy, Ciafone and even Cooke and Caro all of whom would be big underdogs to Daniel

[/ QUOTE ]

As petty as Daniel was in specifically challenging you and Mason, this comment of yours is equally petty. Why do you digress to take a shot at these guys? As far as I know, some of these guys (Jones, Brier, Cooke) only play limit hold 'em. I know that they have only written about limit hold 'em - Nothing else. They are limit hold 'em experts but I doubt that they would accept Daniel's challenge in limit hold 'em. But neither would you. It could be because of playing ability, inability to afford the big stakes, or a combination of the two. Your refusal to play Daniel in limit hold 'em in no way belittles your contributions to limit hold 'em literature nor does it raise red flags as to your competence as a limit hold 'em player.

I don't get why you want to throw tomatos at Jones, Brier, and Cooke in connection with this. But if you wanted to prove that you were a better limit hold 'em player than Jones, Cooke, Brier et al., the way to do it is not to muse theoretically that they would be big dogs to Daniel (and that you wouldn't be). Rather, you could issue your own petty challenge to Jones, Brier, and Cooke to take you on in limit hold 'em. Presumably, at the Bellagio. Heads-up matches every second day for a month or something.

Anyway, the soap opera is interesting to follow. But I can only wonder if noted experts in areas such as bridge, chess etc. are as petty as you folks in the poker arena.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The important thing to understand is that I felt I had to specify what matches I would play to seperate myself from the likes of Jones, Brier, McEvoy, Ciafone and even Cooke and Caro all of whom would be big underdogs to Daniel

[/ QUOTE ]

As petty as Daniel was in specifically challenging you and Mason, this comment of yours is equally petty. Why do you digress to take a shot at these guys? As far as I know, some of these guys (Jones, Brier, Cooke) only play limit hold 'em. I know that they have only written about limit hold 'em - Nothing else. They are limit hold 'em experts but I doubt that they would accept Daniel's challenge in limit hold 'em. But neither would you. It could be because of playing ability, inability to afford the big stakes, or a combination of the two. Your refusal to play Daniel in limit hold 'em in no way belittles your contributions to limit hold 'em literature nor does it raise red flags as to your competence as a limit hold 'em player.

I don't get why you want to throw tomatos at Jones, Brier, and Cooke in connection with this. But if you wanted to prove that you were a better limit hold 'em player than Jones, Cooke, Brier et al., the way to do it is not to muse theoretically that they would be big dogs to Daniel (and that you wouldn't be). Rather, you could issue your own petty challenge to Jones, Brier, and Cooke to take you on in limit hold 'em. Presumably, at the Bellagio. Heads-up matches every second day for a month or something.

Anyway, the soap opera is interesting to follow. But I can only wonder if noted experts in areas such as bridge, chess etc. are as petty as you folks in the poker arena.

[/ QUOTE ]

DS has separated himself from the likes of Jones, Brier etc. Those guys appear to have class.

Sack up Skuhulansky and face the man!

[skp]

jeez, Vince, IMO you are seriously underestimating just how much better the high limit players probably are as compared to the 30-60 blokes. Well, I can't say that you are wrong and I am right for sure because I have never played high limits. But it stands to reason that Negreanu is probably a much better HE player than Brier particularly in a heads-up format where I suspect Jim has very little experience.

If that match ever came about, I would definitely take Daniel. We can have a sidebet.

But if Daniel ever had that match against Carson and gave 10-1, I would take Carson. At the time that that bet was being discussed, Sklansky said that it was a pretty even bet. I can't figure that one out. Presumably, he was just needling carson.

[David Sklansky]

I regret the comment. Shouldn't have named names. My point was that I actually am in the same camp as those who say that someone can't be a great poker writer if they are not also an excellent player. Remember how I said that my five random students would beat Daniel's random students? The same would not be true for just about any non two plus two author, even if they could choose their best game.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]

But if Daniel ever had that match against Carson and gave 10-1, I would take Carson. At the time that that bet was being discussed, Sklansky said that it was a pretty even bet. I can't figure that one out. Presumably, he was just needling carson.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am the only one who finds this hilarious? Sure he is needling Carson, and doing a pretty good job of it too. I would put my sister up for agaist daniel in a 50 BB freeze out at 10-1 and I'd have way the best of it. Anyhow David's arrogance in this thread is so horrible I'm almost embarrassed for him.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know about the rest of you, but $100,000 is serious money to just about anyone except the ultra rich.

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt.

And if David had said, "I can't accept because I'm not bankrolled for that kind of money," I would have respected that.

But that's not what he said.

He made a counter-offer instead, to play for 5:4 odds, and then went on to say he did it because he wanted to show he thought he was Daniel's equal.

I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but simply as a mathmatical proposition that doesn't make sense.

Again, putting the bankroll issue aside for the moment, if you thought you were someone's equal, you'd jump at the chance to play for 10:9 odds.

And at 5:4 odds, I'd jump at the chance to play Daniel Negreanu. (Daniel, if you're reading this, let me know if you feel like playing /images/graemlins/smile.gif )

[Non_Comformist]

[ QUOTE ]
"Those guys like to talk about Noble prizes and such, but when it comes to actually putting some real money on the line they are nowhere to be found."

Show me a Nobel prize winnier who Daniel wouldn't gladly lay 1.25 against.

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is they didn't dedicate much of their lives to poker, you did.

[David Sklansky]

"Again, putting the bankroll issue aside for the moment, if you thought you were someone's equal, you'd jump at the chance to play for 10:9 odds.'

Fair enough. I will play him getting 10K to 9K odds. If I win the first I will play a second. 150-300, Eight or Better Stud $25 ante $50 bring in. I will play at the Wynn if their is no publicity. Also I will LAY those same odds against any of the posters on this thread who criticized me.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Also I will LAY those same odds against any of the posters on this thread who criticized me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, dude is manning up. Someone please take him up on this.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, dude is manning up. Someone please take him up on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but only if you don't like money, because he would clearly rip you all up for arse paper. This whole thread is pathetic, you lot are a bunch of kids who don't understand that the game sin't about [censored] glory or ego. It's about making money, if you are too stupid to figure this out, go play Negreanu yourselves.

Mack

[drexah]

[ QUOTE ]
"Again, putting the bankroll issue aside for the moment, if you thought you were someone's equal, you'd jump at the chance to play for 10:9 odds.'

Fair enough. I will play him getting 10K to 9K odds. If I win the first I will play a second. 150-300, Eight or Better Stud $25 ante $50 bring in. I will play at the Wynn if their is no publicity. Also I will LAY those same odds against any of the posters on this thread who criticized me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thattaboy, David. Here we go.

[drexah]

Wow, dude is manning up. Someone please take him up on this.
Yeah but only if you don't like money, because he would clearly rip you all up for arse paper.

[ QUOTE ]
This whole thread is pathetic, you lot are a bunch of kids who don't understand that the game sin't about [censored] glory or ego.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's about making money, if you are too stupid to figure this out, go play Negreanu yourselves.


Since when...?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Since when...?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since always, I guess you are one of these guys who'd take the bracelet over the cash if you were offered the choice, I'd rather be a rich nobody than a famous broke bum anyday, go figure.

Mack

[LinusKS]

I can't take you up on it, because my bankroll can't support a 9k gamble.

But I would play you for, say, 4k, nl holdem or triple draw, getting 4:5 odds.

Heck, I'd play you for 2 or 3k, at 9:10, just for the chance to play David Sklansky, though I figure I'd be taking the worst of it.

[Matt Flynn]

David I will happily take 5K of your action against Negreanu via FedEx'd cash or cashier's check getting 11:10, hassle free to you (no phone calls, cash in and go home or cash out). I am not wealthy or I would back the whole deal. It would be nice if you could hold it June 18-25 when I will be in Vegas but that's not critical.

As for your heads-up challenge, your tie is crooked (criticism criteria met), and would you play heads up pot limit or no limit holdem?

A suggestion: If you ever decide to do a little promotion, offering heads up matches for smaller stakes to 2+2ers would be well received here. Even at $3,000 you'd get a lot of interest and we'd all enjoy following the games. I'm sure there are people on here who could set up webcasting too.

Matt

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure there are people on here who could set up webcasting too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm drooling over just the thought of this. I like Live at the Bike as much as the next guy but DS HU vs. 2+2 posters would blow it out of the water.

[toots]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also I will LAY those same odds against any of the posters on this thread who criticized me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, dude is manning up. Someone please take him up on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now that DS has come in here and double dog dared his critics, do we get to accuse them of being sackless if they don't man up and accept his challenge?

This is all just silly.

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

That's really, really weak. George Bush could put an evening on his calendar sometime in the distant future to play poker. I mean, we all have jobs...

[Daniel Negreanu]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, let's just crush that last string of excuses once and for all: I'll play at YOUR house, YOU can deal, and you don't even have to worry about supplying refreshments! I'll bring my own bottled water and I'll eat before I get there.

Scrounge up $100,000 and we'll play Stud 8 or better... dude, you can even deal the whole match! Daveyboy... you might be biting off a little more than you can chew, no? Oh and again... you got your 10% back.

I'm certainly not bluffing, are you? Thought so...

[MicroBob]

If you guys square off at at my place I'll be happy to provide refreshments.

Everything goes great with a Ritz!!


I haven't read the whole thread (and all the other ones on this) but I think that DS has already stated that 100k is simply outside his comfort-level.

It is interesting that Daniel has said he'll conduct this thing wherever David likes.
Why can't he agree to do it for lower stakes?


If Mason gave Daniel a couple of handsome 2+2 shirts would Daniel be willing to lower the stakes?

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, let's just crush that last string of excuses once and for all: I'll play at YOUR house, YOU can deal, and you don't even have to worry about supplying refreshments! I'll bring my own bottled water and I'll eat before I get there.

Scrounge up $100,000 and we'll play Stud 8 or better... dude, you can even deal the whole match! Daveyboy... you might be biting off a little more than you can chew, no? Oh and again... you got your 10% back.

I'm certainly not bluffing, are you? Thought so...

[/ QUOTE ]

That was like the most magnificent pwnaging ever.

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, let's just crush that last string of excuses once and for all: I'll play at YOUR house, YOU can deal, and you don't even have to worry about supplying refreshments! I'll bring my own bottled water and I'll eat before I get there.

Scrounge up $100,000 and we'll play Stud 8 or better... dude, you can even deal the whole match! Daveyboy... you might be biting off a little more than you can chew, no? Oh and again... you got your 10% back.

I'm certainly not bluffing, are you? Thought so...

[/ QUOTE ]

DS would crush you in Stud/8, be careful what you wish for....

[David Sklansky]

Weird post. Almost sounds like Daniel thought I was implying I might get cheated at the Wynn. Of course The Wynn Factor I was speaking about was that bringing business to the Wynn was worth something in itself. Else why make an offer where he himself admits opens him up to matches where he is at least a slight underdog.

Anyway it sounds like he thinks he would easily win more than the required 53% of the time. It also seems he hasn't read what I said I would play. Which among other things is taking a 20% rebate on $50,000. I will play that at the Wynn as long as there is no media.

[Sightless]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that even if Daniel is putting up all the money he is actually getting laid an indirect price because of the Wynn factor. So it is right for him to play if the game is even or if he is a slight dog. Not so for his challengers. They either have to be a definite favorite or get a moderate spot to have the same type of good bet that Daniel gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, let's just crush that last string of excuses once and for all: I'll play at YOUR house, YOU can deal, and you don't even have to worry about supplying refreshments! I'll bring my own bottled water and I'll eat before I get there.

Scrounge up $100,000 and we'll play Stud 8 or better... dude, you can even deal the whole match! Daveyboy... you might be biting off a little more than you can chew, no? Oh and again... you got your 10% back.

I'm certainly not bluffing, are you? Thought so...

[/ QUOTE ]

DS would crush you in Stud/8, be careful what you wish for....

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you so sure?

[chucksim]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read the whole thread (and all the other ones on this) but I think that DS has already stated that 100k is simply outside his comfort-level.

It is interesting that Daniel has said he'll conduct this thing wherever David likes.
Why can't he agree to do it for lower stakes?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is getting really stupid. I've read a lot of this stuff, but certainly not all of it in all these threads. Is this series of events close to how all this got started?

Daniel makes his open challenge.
Mason and/or David make an off-handed comment in these forums that he'll be a dog in most matches.
Daniel takes offense and says lets play.
David says cost is too high/wants odds/different game/etc.
Daniel gives odds at David's game (well not hi/lo no qualifier as David would certainly prefer, but stud/8)
David wants better odds at lower stakes ($50K).

Sounds to me like Daniel has already given up a lot more than David has even considered giving up. I'm sure David could get staked up to $100K from 2+2ers alone and play the match if he really wanted to.

Don't misunderstand me. I really like David and credit him first and foremost with my development as a poker player and critical thinker in general. However, the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash.

That's really interesting considering these matches are admittedly pretty much coin flips. Even Daniel has admitted the outcome of one or several matches doesn't necessarily mean one player is "better" than the other. If David loses, so what? Blame the Variance Monster.

This is getting so much like Pro Wrestling it's sickening, especially coming from two intelligent adults. I'd say they were both colluding to get the most bang for their marketing and promotional buck until David said "no media" (even though, if played, this will still get plenty of coverage from the bloggers and other interested parties).

Bottom line, either play the game or knock it off.

[Gigabet]

I think you are goofy....I'll take the 10:9 now, where at? What time, and can you get there earlier?

[ononimo]

[ QUOTE ]
What time, and can you get there earlier?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hilarious.

[ononimo]

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel makes his open challenge.
Mason and/or David make an off-handed comment in these forums that he'll be a dog in most matches.
Daniel takes offense and says lets play.
David says cost is too high/wants odds/different game/etc.
Daniel gives odds at David's game (well not hi/lo no qualifier as David would certainly prefer, but stud/8)
David wants better odds at lower stakes ($50K).

Sounds to me like Daniel has already given up a lot more than David has even considered giving up. I'm sure David could get staked up to $100K from 2+2ers alone and play the match if he really wanted to.

Don't misunderstand me. I really like David and credit him first and foremost with my development as a poker player and critical thinker in general. However, the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed - Daniel has clearly made an effort to compromise to accomodate David and David just keeps asking for more concessions.

[ QUOTE ]
Bottom line, either play the game or knock it off.

[/ QUOTE ]

AGREEED!

[David Sklansky]

"the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash."

Here is the math to prove my 50-40 offer proves I must feel I am at least 48%.

If we played 100 times and I won 48 I would be ahead $320,000. My EV is $3200.

For me to flip a coin for $40,000, someone would have to pay me a minimum of about $2,000.

For someone to get me to sit in a chair for five hours they would have to pay me a minimum of $1200.

And yes, that really is how I usually think about these things.

[That guy]

if we plot a utility function for:

'edge needed' relative to 'amount of money involved'... at what amount of money would a tiny edge (00.1%) -- relative to a coin flip -- be attractive?

what about for $1,000 --- what % edge would be needed to take on 100 coin flips?

this is a personal preference question but could also could theoretically be calculated relative to a risk-free rate and the time spent flipping the coins.

what is the best link for Kelly Criterion anyway??

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
"the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash."

Here is the math to prove my 50-40 offer proves I must feel I am at least 48%.

If we played 100 times and I won 48 I would be ahead $320,000. My EV is $3200.

For me to flip a coin for $40,000, someone would have to pay me a minimum of about $2,000.

For someone to get me to sit in a chair for five hours they would have to pay me a minimum of $1200.

And yes, that really is how I usually think about these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if Daniel brought over a real comfy chair? What a joke. Play the man.....

[toots]

But David, he TRIPLE DOG DARED you.

Everyone knows that you'll just never be able to show your face around the schoolyard again if you don't accept a triple dog dare.

[jackdaniels]

Hey Daniel,

Looks like you have another challenger (if you are willing to lay 10-9) - Quoting Gigabet:

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are goofy....I'll take the 10:9 now, where at? What time, and can you get there earlier?


[/ QUOTE ]

So, will there be a game here of what?

On another note, I am willing to put up $1000 in backing for David to play this match - based on Daniels latest offer (10-9 for $100k).

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I was hoping this wouldn't happen, and I expect some of our readers will react negatively to this post, but I've had enough of Negreanu. This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet. Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.

Last night I played some poker at The Wynn. They had one limit $40-$80 which broke shortly after midnight, and no $10-$20 blind no limit. It looks to me that this room is going to be a disappointment to those of us who were hoping it could provide real competition to The Bellagio. As far as I can tell, Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.

When he calls David "Daveyboy," I see the old pattern reappearing. Negreanu has in many ways become one of the biggest names in poker. No one can his deny his tremendous success, especially in the tournaments. You would think that because of his success he would be magnanimous to all, and a true ambassador to all of poker. Instead, we see something different. I nor David will have nothing more to say on this matter (although David will stand by his statements about the games that he would play).

I do want to make one other point. The amount of money that Negreanu is challenging us for is not an issue for either David or myself. However, gambling for this type of money on low edge propositions goes against most of what we teach and have written about. Yes, Two Plus Two has been very successful as can be seen by the size of this site. We thank everyone for their support and would like to get on to more worthwhile issues.

Best wishes,
Mason

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night I played some poker at The Wynn. They had one limit $40-$80 which broke shortly after midnight, and no $10-$20 blind no limit. It looks to me that this room is going to be a disappointment to those of us who were hoping it could provide real competition to The Bellagio. As far as I can tell, Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

But earlier you said:

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]


/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night I played some poker at The Wynn. They had one limit $40-$80 which broke shortly after midnight, and no $10-$20 blind no limit. It looks to me that this room is going to be a disappointment to those of us who were hoping it could provide real competition to The Bellagio. As far as I can tell, Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



But earlier you said:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason



[/ QUOTE ]

Hilarious....

I now predict we'll see a semantical analysis comparing and contrasting "play for an evening" versus "last night I played some poker...."

[That guy]

[ QUOTE ]
However, gambling for this type of money on low edge propositions goes against most of what we teach and have written about.

[/ QUOTE ]

ftr, I have found Davids posts regarding Daniels challenge to be logical and educational. It is agreed that acting with a little more respect towards others would really be the professional (and more likeable) way to go...

I am always impressed with how Phil Ivey acts... always has respect for others. Daniel could do well to act a little more like Ivey and a little less like the Daniel of old...

[chucksim]

[ QUOTE ]
"the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash."

Here is the math to prove my 50-40 offer proves I must feel I am at least 48%.

If we played 100 times and I won 48 I would be ahead $320,000. My EV is $3200.

For me to flip a coin for $40,000, someone would have to pay me a minimum of about $2,000.

For someone to get me to sit in a chair for five hours they would have to pay me a minimum of $1200.

And yes, that really is how I usually think about these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Understood, and well within your rights to play only when you want to, which for you means when you have a high enough +EV.

So if Daniel won't give you 50/40, or even 100/80 (assuming you could raise the capital, which I'm sure you could, and your pay would be the same) why is this still continuing?

Since this is your job, make it an employment analogy.

He made a job offer. You countered that you want better pay. He upped his offer, and you still want more. OK, but in this case, he's the employer. If he stops negotiating, either you work for the terms the employer is willing to offer or you respectfully decline the offer and move on.

With all due respect, why should he play lower than his stated minimum and give odds simply to accommodate you? I'm sure he will have plenty of other takers to his original challenge to appease him.

[mackthefork]

Well put, this has gone beyond childish, I'm glad you both refuse to entertain these matches without an edge necessary to justify the variance and time involved, to do otherwise would be stupid.

Regards Mack

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night I played some poker at The Wynn. They had one limit $40-$80 which broke shortly after midnight, and no $10-$20 blind no limit. It looks to me that this room is going to be a disappointment to those of us who were hoping it could provide real competition to The Bellagio. As far as I can tell, Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



But earlier you said:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Dog:

I am too busy to play for an evening. I'm in the middle of proofreading Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume II and it is tough going. We have agreed to do an in store promotion in Borders with this book that starts June 20. For us to make this date, I have to work non-stop the next week to 10 days, and then there can be no printing glitches.

Just to give you a specific of how busy I've been this year, my total hours at the poker table from 1/1/05 to now is about 90. I remember when I use to play almost everyday.

Best wishes,
Mason



[/ QUOTE ]

Hilarious....

I now predict we'll see a semantical analysis comparing and contrasting "play for an evening" versus "last night I played some poker...."

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO! DS&amp;MM should just know when to quit when they are losing. Hey everyone, lets all go to fullcontact poker! lol

[grandgnu]

Daniel is acting like a child. Granted, David &amp; Mason are a bit odd in their responses, but I believe because they were trying to say "no" without appearing like they couldn't handle the pressure.

Daniel just wants to drum up business for Wynn and is like a spammer, constantly hammering you until you finally give in. Daniel USED to be humble, modest and respectful. Now he's running around like his crap doesn't stink, and thinking he's the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

He's a great player, but he's too much of a businessman now.

[Your Mom]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

I was hoping this wouldn't happen, and I expect some of our readers will react negatively to this post, but I've had enough of Negreanu. This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet. Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.

Last night I played some poker at The Wynn. They had one limit $40-$80 which broke shortly after midnight, and no $10-$20 blind no limit. It looks to me that this room is going to be a disappointment to those of us who were hoping it could provide real competition to The Bellagio. As far as I can tell, Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.

When he calls David "Daveyboy," I see the old pattern reappearing. Negreanu has in many ways become one of the biggest names in poker. No one can his deny his tremendous success, especially in the tournaments. You would think that because of his success he would be magnanimous to all, and a true ambassador to all of poker. Instead, we see something different. I nor David will have nothing more to say on this matter (although David will stand by his statements about the games that he would play).

I do want to make one other point. The amount of money that Negreanu is challenging us for is not an issue for either David or myself. However, gambling for this type of money on low edge propositions goes against most of what we teach and have written about. Yes, Two Plus Two has been very successful as can be seen by the size of this site. We thank everyone for their support and would like to get on to more worthwhile issues.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Daniel has the maturity level of a nine year old. Really, it is pretty sad. I had begun to really like Daniel the last year or so. His blog and his appearance in this thread have changed my opinion of him greatly. To me, he seems like he is manic depressive (A family member of mine acts similar to Daniel, except he isn't nearly as immature.)

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
but he's too much of a businessman now.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, if he were too much a businessman, he would not risk alienating one of the more valuable poker resources on the internet.

I would say:

"He is too much of an idiot now."

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone give the details behind these issues?

[Mason Malmuth]

HOH: Volume II has now been delivered to the printer. I've decided to break for a few days before I begin work on the next book (by Alan Schoonmaker) that we will publish. Thus I now have a little time to play poker again, but that won't last for long.

By the way, we at this moment have six different books at the printer. Five are reprints but several of them were re-typeset, and it has been a super amount of work.

MM

[ QUOTE ]
I was hoping this wouldn't happen, and I expect some of our readers will react negatively to this post, but I've had enough of Negreanu. This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet. Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your whole post is trash. Why bring up stuff that is best left in private? Making references to "nasty e-mails" and mentioning that you removed an endorsement from Negraneu is way more juvenile than anything Daniel has done.

What I see is two cowards trying to sling mud upon Daniel's name just because he has challenged either of you to a HU match which you won't accept.

Furthermore, you're acting like the publicity of this match will only help Daniel and the Wynn. Not true. A David v. Daniel match would be good for all of poker and could be good publicity for 2+2 if you guys would stop being such dildos. Additionally, many 2+2ers have offered to stake David so David would in essence only be risking his reputation.

I think both of you (David and Mason) are too blinded by your own egos to see this match as something that could really be good for the game of poker and 2+2. Bleh.

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was hoping this wouldn't happen, and I expect some of our readers will react negatively to this post, but I've had enough of Negreanu. This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet. Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your whole post is trash. Why bring up stuff that is best left in private? Making references to "nasty e-mails" and mentioning that you removed an endorsement from Negraneu is way more juvenile than anything Daniel has done.

What I see is two cowards trying to sling mud upon Daniel's name just because he has challenged either of you to a HU match which you won't accept.

Furthermore, you're acting like the publicity of this match will only help Daniel and the Wynn. Not true. A David v. Daniel match would be good for all of poker and could be good publicity for 2+2 if you guys would stop being such dildos. Additionally, many 2+2ers have offered to stake David so David would in essence only be risking his reputation.

I think both of you (David and Mason) are too blinded by your own egos to see this match as something that could really be good for the game of poker and 2+2. Bleh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your name fits you Fecal. If you can't see that it's Daniel being the annoying bitch here, then I guess you might want to wipe your namesake from your eyes.

[trying2learn]

i can actually say with ease that i'm a big fan of all parties involved, and i'm WAY over it. i haven't thought anyone was ever THAT far out of line, but it sure has been good fodder for everyone around here. it almost makes me want the vince/smoothcall debates to come back....almost.

[hotdog da 2rd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was hoping this wouldn't happen, and I expect some of our readers will react negatively to this post, but I've had enough of Negreanu. This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet. Some of you may remember his attacks made towards me a few years back on RGP, but you never saw or heard about the nasty email he also sent me around that time.

At David's request, we had put an endorsement on Tournament Poker for Advanced Players from Negreanu, but I as the publisher of Two Plus Two, and not David, removed it after the Annie Duke attacks even though I'm not one of her fans either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your whole post is trash. Why bring up stuff that is best left in private? Making references to "nasty e-mails" and mentioning that you removed an endorsement from Negraneu is way more juvenile than anything Daniel has done.

What I see is two cowards trying to sling mud upon Daniel's name just because he has challenged either of you to a HU match which you won't accept.

Furthermore, you're acting like the publicity of this match will only help Daniel and the Wynn. Not true. A David v. Daniel match would be good for all of poker and could be good publicity for 2+2 if you guys would stop being such dildos. Additionally, many 2+2ers have offered to stake David so David would in essence only be risking his reputation.

I think both of you (David and Mason) are too blinded by your own egos to see this match as something that could really be good for the game of poker and 2+2. Bleh.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're unemployed and bitter aren't you? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
you're unemployed and bitter aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're about as witty as a talking piece of poo.

[toots]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you're unemployed and bitter aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're about as witty as a talking piece of poo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe so, but unlike you, I'm betting he isn't bitter and unemployed.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Your whole post is trash. Why bring up stuff that is best left in private? Making references to "nasty e-mails" and mentioning that you removed an endorsement from Negraneu is way more juvenile than anything Daniel has done.

What I see is two cowards trying to sling mud upon Daniel's name just because he has challenged either of you to a HU match which you won't accept.

Furthermore, you're acting like the publicity of this match will only help Daniel and the Wynn. Not true. A David v. Daniel match would be good for all of poker and could be good publicity for 2+2 if you guys would stop being such dildos. Additionally, many 2+2ers have offered to stake David so David would in essence only be risking his reputation.

I think both of you (David and Mason) are too blinded by your own egos to see this match as something that could really be good for the game of poker and 2+2. Bleh.




[/ QUOTE ]

Your name and this post are kindred spirits, if they were blinded by their egos they would be off playing 500k HU matches with no edge, and probably go broke just like you most likely will if you think this is a good idea.

Mack

[hotdog da 2rd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you're unemployed and bitter aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're about as witty as a talking piece of poo.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can't comment, i have never spoken to poo before. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Your name and this post are kindred spirits, if they were blinded by their egos they would be off playing 500k HU matches with no edge, and probably go broke just like you most likely will if you think this is a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it still a bad idea if David is staked 100% by 2+2ers? It's only a bad idea in that case if David thinks he will lose so badly to Daniel that his reputation (and hence ego) will be tarnished.

Most of the posters on this board remind me of The Borg.

[skp]

Jeez, you really are not doing Canada proud with this juvenile stuff. On the other hand, David has said a few juvenile things about other writers/poker players so it's not like he doesn't deserve it.

But isn't the point simple: You want to play at stakes that (probably) mean a helluva lot to David and very little to you particularly given the "Wynn factor". Obviously, you are going to have the edge. If the Sultan of Brunei gave Sklansky $5 million (or whatever the heck your bankroll is at) to play you heads-up in the game of YOUR choice, would you do it?

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi TransientR:

A lot of the proof reading has to do with exactly the way I want the final type setting to look. That just can't be farmed out.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I hope you do a better with Vol. 2 than you did with Vol. 1. I found at least 4 errors, and I'm not even done. If I were your teacher, I'd give you a C.

You should have someone read behind you, to catch what you miss. I am willing to do it for free.

[chucksim]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a loose cannon who continues to attack people on the Internet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regrettably, I agree. I am disappointed by the tone of Daniel's last "Daveyboy" post, and was hoping it wasn't him who made it. Unfortunately, it appears that it really was him.

[ QUOTE ]

Negreanu, their so called host, cares little about the players in his cardroom. Instead, he comes here and makes juvenile challenges for no reason. David had already made clear where he stands on these matches, and I want nothing to do with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I give Mason his due. He's stayed out of it. David, however, has kept this going. If the progression of this feud was:

I challenge anyone to a 100K-500K match---this means you S&amp;M, then I blame Daniel for the entire fiasco.

However, as I see it, it appears to be that he only directly called out S&amp;M after both said he'd be a dog (as is their opinion), and then David started the counteroffers.

Daniel made the challenge. If David didn't want the game, don't say anything other than "That's not my game". I'd have even more respect for him that way.

The comment that appears to have started this whole mess; that Daniel would be a dog in many matches, is undoubtedly true. No way would I walk into a match with him unless I was playing MY best game. I honestly don't think Daniel disputes that. The problem is the haughty "you should play me under these conditions" response that David has chosen to stand by.

Sklansky's books were the first I read on poker, and I am certainly a "Sklansky-ite" with my playing style and philosophy on the game. I will continue to read and respect everything he chooses to write about the game. However, I am thoroughly disappointed with his responses in this entire argument.

Either you play by the challenger's rules, or you ignore the challenge, as it does not apply to you. Continuing the discussion is fruitless, especially when everything you say looks like you are begging for concessions at every turn.

I am glad Mason's post indicates that nothing will be said about it from S&amp;M in the future. If Daniel continues his jabbing, I will lose a ton of respect for him.

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep writing stuff like that and Daniel will soon challenge YOU, offering 10-1 like he did Gary Carson.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd play Daniel for 10:1 in NL, and I play $1/$2. Daniel?

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are goofy....I'll take the 10:9 now, where at? What time, and can you get there earlier?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this gonna happen?

[David Sklansky]

"The problem is the haughty "you should play me under these conditions" response that David has chosen to stand by"

Why did you say this totally wrong statement? I merely listed my minimum requirements for the benefit of the forum in case they thought I had even greater requirements. The statements weren't even DIRECTED at Daniel and it was irrelevant to me if they ever got back to him. I've said that five times now.

[chucksim]

[ QUOTE ]
"The problem is the haughty "you should play me under these conditions" response that David has chosen to stand by"

Why did you say this totally wrong statement? I merely listed my minimum requirements for the benefit of the forum in case they thought I had even greater requirements. The statements weren't even DIRECTED at Daniel and it was irrelevant to me if they ever got back to him. I've said that five times now.

[/ QUOTE ]

In going back and rereading your posts, I give you that; your posts weren't explicitly directed as challenges AT Daniel. I apologize for saying that was the case.

However, in replying directly to the thread started by him, along with the others, and doing so in the manner you chose, in can certainly be construed that you are implicitly making a counteroffer, especially when your replies are mixed with all the chaff that has shown up in the last 6 days.

Perception is oftentimes reality, and judging by the tone of everything I've read, it is certainly perceived by most (as it was by me) that you've taken a "my way or the highway" stand on this, and it definitely looks like it was directed AT Daniel, whether or not that is what you had intended.

I'll venture to say a majority at this forum, including me, didn't really care one way or the other before this discussion started whether or not you wanted to play this match, and under which conditions you would do so. Whether you make or lose $10 or $500K playing poker is irrelevant to me.

As a fan of the sport, I always love to see two great players go at it, so I'd love to see you play this one. You proved all of your critics (including Daniel) wrong at the Heads Up Championship in beating Ivey and Chan who were supposed to have crushed you.

I came here because of my respect for what you have written and your knowledge of the game, and I will stay here for that same reason. I apologize that my interpretation of your statements was wrong, but I hope you understand why it can easily be seen that way.

[d1sterbd]

I thought Daniel was out of line before as well.. but the more I read these crazy excuses and conditions that David comes up with, the more I think that David has handled this situation much worse than Daniel.

David should have just declined and left it alone. He is posting about Daniel being an underdog to everyone he faces. It may be true, but why post this after turning down the challenge?

He is posting about how him and others would be favorites in games that were made up on the spot. He has played analyzed Hold'em for decades and has wrote several books, yet when he is picking a game to play against Daniel, he eventually chooses Stud/8?

These excuses make him look bad. He could have handled it much better by just declining and ignoring Daniel.

[Matt Flynn]

To me Daniel calling David Daveyboy is just routine goading to get a match. All part of poker. No special feelings or meaning need apply. It's almost a generational difference here more than any specific disrespect.

Also, who the heck says David can't negotiate the match? I would in his shoes. He has been crystal clear why.

Matt

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it still a bad idea if David is staked 100% by 2+2ers? It's only a bad idea in that case if David thinks he will lose so badly to Daniel that his reputation (and hence ego) will be tarnished.

[/ QUOTE ]


The idea of staking David 50% or 100% has come up quite a bit....and I haven't read all the posts on this....but I really don't think it makes a difference to Mason and David.


I think David is comfortable with where his reputation is. Trying to improve upon that reputation or prevent the rep from being tarnished is likely not much of a consideration for him. I believe he is looking at it from just an EV standpoint as he has indicated.


Lets say some guy challenges me to a match for $200...is this really how I want to spend my day?
Heading to some casino to play a coin-flippish match (after I gauge his skill and with whatever odds I'm getting lets say I put myself at a 52-48 favorite) to waste a few hours just because some guy challenged my manliness??


Lets then say some guy challenges me to a match for $10k.
I don't have $10k that I'm willing to risk but someone wants to stake me.
Grand.

I explain that I'm a so-so player and that heads-up is not my specialty (and that it can tend to be a toss-up anyway).
The guy staking me says that's okay...he's pretty sure i'm the better player...and that he is getting 52-48 odds and he likes his chances....and besides he wants to GAMBOOOOOL.

Okay. great. He's comfortable with it.
But what's in it for me?
I drive down to Tunica (about 30 minutes) to play a match that I expect will last 5 hours or so. I'll play my best....but I'm playing for someone else.
Afterwards I'm no better or worse off than I was before.
I'm out 5 hours of my time.
5 hours that i could have used to stay home and grind it out on the internet games.


Basically when you ask 'what do you have to lose?' the answer (whether it's coming out of my own pocket OR whether someone is staking me 100%) is 'nothing significant....it just happens to be a waste of my time.'


If David is comfortable with his reputation then there is no need for him to 'prove' himself.
With that being the case he has no incentive to play it unless he believes he is getting enough value out of the deal relative to the time spent and effort put forth.



I would very much like to see this match happen because I like the pro-wrestling, "I could kick your ass" aspect of it.
But I have quite a bit of respect for David for not saying something along the lines of, "Bring it on Bee-atch!!! I will tear you apart!!" or some other such nonsense.

He continued to analyze it from an EV perspective and to that end I believe I have learned something from his approach to this whole thing.

[chucksim]

[ QUOTE ]
To me Daniel calling David Daveyboy is just routine goading to get a match. All part of poker. No special feelings or meaning need apply. It's almost a generational difference here more than any specific disrespect.

Also, who the heck says David can't negotiate the match? I would in his shoes. He has been crystal clear why.

Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said he couldn't negotiate. A previous post I made should have made that clear. When I thought David was trying to negotiate a match, my only point was that it sounded like he kept asking for more and more as the talks went on.

In any case, talk of negotiations are now moot now because David has said there is no challenge to Daniel; just a statement of what he will or won't accept. If Daniel won't accept that, both sides should drop it; David can go play 300/600, Daniel can play his HU challenge matches, and we can respect both sides in peace.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
However, as I see it, it appears to be that he only directly called out S&amp;M after both said he'd be a dog (as is their opinion), and then David started the counteroffers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep in mind, Mason only said Daniel would be a dog in nearly ever match he played (I agree with this). He never claimed that he would be a dog to either David or himself.

[rwesty]

Solution:

David puts up $40,000 of his own money, backers put up $50,000. David gets $50,000 and the backers get $50,000 if he wins. Anyone who thinks David is a favorite in this match is making a +EV bet. David has said he is willing to gamble for the amounts proposed here.

[lastchance]

And that was no knock on DN. No player in the world would be favorable putting up the challenge DN made.

[Al Schoonmaker]

The major reason that 2+2 books excel is that Mason gets so deeply involved in them. He is the epitome of "hands on management."

Al

[grandgnu]

Deck Of Plastic Playing Cards: $12

Poker Strategy Book: $34.95

WPT DVD Collection: $79.95


Watching David Sklansky shout "How You Like DEEZ NUTZ BIATCH?!" after Daniel slowplays pocket Aces and David flops a full house with 9/2 offsuit

..................priceless.

[IronUnkind]

Passive aggressives rarely direct their statements at the intended target. That way, they can plead innocent on later streets.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

Tho I usually ignore this forum, I do find this whole "pissing for distance" thing quite amusing. So I offer a challenge of my own...

I'll take on ANYONE in ANY GAME THEY WANT in ANY FORMAT THEY WANT at MY HOUSE and I'll even LAY $21 to $20 odds!

In addition, I will provide the refreshments! (alcoholic refreshments are all I actually have in my fridge tho)

In addition to all that, you can even pet my dog's head first for good luck! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

What a guy I am! How can you pass up that kind of deal!

al

[mosquito]

[ QUOTE ]
Tho I usually ignore this forum, I do find this whole "pissing for distance" thing quite amusing. So I offer a challenge of my own...

I'll take on ANYONE in ANY GAME THEY WANT in ANY FORMAT THEY WANT at MY HOUSE and I'll even LAY $21 to $20 odds!

In addition, I will provide the refreshments! (alcoholic refreshments are all I actually have in my fridge tho)

In addition to all that, you can even pet my dog's head first for good luck! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

What a guy I am! How can you pass up that kind of deal!

al

[/ QUOTE ]

There has to be a less expensive way for you to
get company/entertainment........ /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Al_Capone_Junior]

Seats for my home game are in such demand it's by reservation only now. Everyone found out I play half my hands to the river blind. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

al

[btlee]

[ QUOTE ]
So there are typical situations where someone should turn down +EV events?

simply pass on small edges to pursue bigger edges... would you bet $100k to win $110k on a coin weighted 52% in your favor??? f-no

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell yeah. you should. and do it again and again and again and again.....

[btlee]

[ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I will play him getting 10K to 9K odds. If I win the first I will play a second. 150-300, Eight or Better Stud $25 ante $50 bring in. I will play at the Wynn if their is no publicity. Also I will LAY those same odds against any of the posters on this thread who criticized me.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh yeah, and you used their instead of there. writers should proof read. now: if that counts as a critical statement I would like to know how to set up our match.

no, this is not an empty post. $10K and a room at the Wynn says so.

[set57hike]

This is ridiculous.

Let's suppose Bill Gates made the same type of calculation. Let's say that Bill Gates would demand $498,000 to sit in a chair for 5 hours (this is in line with a very low estimate of the annual income he earns from his massive fortune). Let's further assume that he would also demand $2,000 for a $40,000 coinflip, as this is a completely arbitrary level of risk aversion.

This means Mr. Gates would need an expected value of $500,000 for it to be worth his time. So, by David's reasoning, Bill G. could counter offer Daniel N. a game at $1,085,000:$40,000 and then Bill G could claim that this proves that he believes he has a 48% or better chance of defeating Daniel N. Of course, Daniel N. is going to accept an offer like this! Why? Because, as pointed out by Ed Miller, a monkey could win frequently enough to give Daniel N. a negative expectation for this wager. If Daniel N. requires the same positive expectation of $3200 on his wager, he would have to believe that he would win more than 96.7% of the time to accept this counterproposal.

Come on David.... do you really expect Daniel N. to pay you for your time ($1200) and risk aversion ($2000) as you have done above, and then use that as evidence of your self confidence? Because demanding terms of 50/40 imply to me that you believe your chance of winning is 44 4/9%, not 48%.
This kind of argument works well for your own internal decisionmaking, but it doesn't work too well to convince people you are just a marginal underdog to Daniel N.

Honestly, this kind of event probably has an abstract value to both David and Daniel in the form of publicity and "goodwill". From this point of view, I could argue that David's counterproposal actually shows that he believes that he would only win 40% or more of the time, if I put an arbitrary value of $7200 to David on the publicity and notoriety of this kind of match. Heck... sell a DVD of the match and you might make more than this in real money instead of just "goodwill".

[set57hike]

This is not correct. I'll assume the 50K/40K offer. Suppose Daniel N. requires the same +$3200 expectation that David requires. In that case, Daniel would have to win more than 59% for this to be worth his time.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not correct. I'll assume the 50K/40K offer. Suppose Daniel N. requires the same +$3200 expectation that David requires. In that case, Daniel would have to win more than 59% for this to be worth his time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might want to think next time before telling Sklansky his math is off. In other words, this post is stupid.

[dbruin]

There's and old saying that those who can't do...teach.

Sklansky and Malmuth's books have been invaluable to my development as a player, and for that I am very grateful. There's no need for either one of them to be ashamed to admit that Mr. Negreanu is better at high limit heads up play than either of them. I just wish (as other posters have already stated) that rather than make very flimsy excuses for not accepting the challenge that they just politely declined and went on their way.

[set57hike]

The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread the thread. David never said it had to be a good bet for Daniel. He's said numerous times that his counteroffer was meant to show what odds he'd take the bet at.

[set57hike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread the thread. David never said it had to be a good bet for Daniel. He's said numerous times that his counteroffer was meant to show what odds he'd take the bet at.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe YOU need to reread the thread. Here is the specific post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2438696&amp;page=0&amp;view=c ollapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;vc=1) of David's that I was replying to...

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway it sounds like he [Daniel N.] thinks he would easily win more than the required 53% of the time. It also seems he hasn't read what I said I would play. Which among other things is taking a 20% rebate on $50,000. I will play that at the Wynn as long as there is no media.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying that Daniel would have to believe his chances of winning are 59 1/9 % or better, not 53% or better.

The comic book confrontation is fun though.

If David S. believes he is pretty close in skill to Daniel N. , he just say that instead of offering a contrived counteroffer to "prove" it. More discussion of David's "proof" here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2455836&amp;page=0&amp;view=c ollapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;vc=1) (which is in response to David's post here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2439116&amp;page=0&amp;view=c ollapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;vc=1))

[Luv2DriveTT]

[ QUOTE ]
Tho I usually ignore this forum, I do find this whole "pissing for distance" thing quite amusing. So I offer a challenge of my own...

I'll take on ANYONE in ANY GAME THEY WANT in ANY FORMAT THEY WANT at MY HOUSE and I'll even LAY $21 to $20 odds!

[/ QUOTE ]

First time for me in this silly forum as well Al. I take you up on your challenge, provided I have the time to come over in June. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

TT /images/graemlins/club.gif

[dedmoney]

http://im.edirectory.co.uk/products/217/i/vagisilfemwash175.jpg

jeebus, some of you guys need a little something for your chapped vaginas.

This is probably one of the greatest threads ever.

I used to think DN was like a gay version of worm from rounders, but he's actually grown on me. I especially like his new angle of being a 120 pound bully.

Shame on you sklansky for making so many excuses. Either sh!t or get off the pot, enough of this ddrawing lines in the sand BS. F it, play him for a grand, head up, just for bragging rights. 3 out of 5. All this posturing is making you look foolish.

[mslucky]

[ QUOTE ]
"the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash."

Here is the math to prove my 50-40 offer proves I must feel I am at least 48%.

If we played 100 times and I won 48 I would be ahead $320,000. My EV is $3200.

For me to flip a coin for $40,000, someone would have to pay me a minimum of about $2,000.

For someone to get me to sit in a chair for five hours they would have to pay me a minimum of $1200.

And yes, that really is how I usually think about these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking the same thing before I read this.
You don't have to prove anything! Better places for the money.
Your still my hero!