Why Daniel May Have Been a Big Favorite. [Archive]

David Sklansky

05-17-2005, 06:51 PM

I barely know Mimi so this is just speculation. But what I wanted to point out is that those who thought that Mimi should beat Daniel because of her success in big holdem games may have been missing something. And I do NOT mean that she isn't used to shorthanded or tough competition. But if she hasn't played much headsup there is one specific thing she isn't used to. Namely the small blind on the button.

Even if she has lots of three handed experience it doesn't matter much because of this difference. If the button folds and she is the small blind it is correct to fold a lot more hands than it would be if you had position. A lot more. As far as raising on the button, in a three handed game, you are risking four to win three and have two opponents to contend with. Head up you are risking three to win three and are against only one opponent.

Carrying this further we see that the big blind in a three handed game can assume a bit more of a hand from the button than heads up. This allows more folds on the flop after calling a raise. In fact it allows you to avoid flops where you have absolutely nothing. But you can't do that playing headup against a headup expert. If the button has two blank cards and always raises preflop and bets the flop he will break about even against a big blind who always need something to continue on.

Ironically there is a lot of math in headup, just as in full games. There is less math in shorthanded. But in headup there are so many little pots where both players have nothing and a bluffer is getting 4-1 or so a full analysis of those situations is needed to handle them right. If Mimi didn't do this analysis but merely tried to transfer her skills as a shorthanded player to this match she was in trouble. (Again I know little about her. Maybe she has played a lot of head up. Maybe she has done extensive analysis.) Because Daniel, you can be sure, has thought a lot along these lines. He like to downplay math in his writings but I have talked to him and know better. He also is now associated with The University of Alberta's excellent head up holdem computer program so who knows how much he has learned from that.

istewart

05-17-2005, 07:14 PM

Interesting.

JihadOnTheRiver

05-17-2005, 07:25 PM

Mr. Sklansky,

Is anybody in the "above-human" level of poker talking about the thought that Daniel may not be 100% of this game? That is to say, maybe the Wynn itself is backing him for some "free" publicity? It would be an interesting ploy, since Daniel can't be much less than 1:1 on all of these games, but I figure if it were that way, they would be advertising the challenge more.

My only real thought on the issue is this: DN is obvious a good player with a good bit of gamble in him, but he's very smart and analytical, and HAS to know that he's probably not an odds on favorite to win against all these opponents who get to choose their own game. But could the only reason be that he craves the action and this is the only way he can get it away from the B is this offer? As it looks, he's out of the Big Game for a while.

-Jihad

TheShootah

05-17-2005, 07:26 PM

This has already been discussed in great detail not only here but on Daniel's site. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

FrankLu99

05-17-2005, 09:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]
indeed.

i would not be surprised if Mimi did some research before playing or tried to level up her HU skills. She probably had Barry power level her hand reading skills and aggression factor.

/images/graemlins/club.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/frown.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

srw5n

05-17-2005, 09:28 PM

David-

For lack of a better expression, duh.

Yes, that is heads up poker. Anyone with even a remedial understand of nature of heads up poker understands these basic concepts. I can't imagine Mimi Tran went into a game of heads up limit poker with absolutely no idea of the fundementals of the game.

The reality is heads up is far different from ultra short and you need to push small edges and draws hard. While I know nothing of Mimi Tran, I do know she plays regularly online heads up and short handed.

If she honestly play as "a big blind who always need something to continue on" then she would be giving the game away. I can't imagine that someone who is even moderately intelligent wouldn't recognize this. Clearly she is going to reraise liberally from the BB, play unimproved A-x hard, and make all the other necessary adjustments for heads up limit holdem.

Your comment seems tantamount to saying, "maybe she didn't understand the game she was playing." Because the items you've pointed out are as basic as they come in heads up limit holdem.

Do you honestly thing she didn't understand the game she way playing?

-srw

05-17-2005, 09:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you honestly thing she didn't understand the game she way playing?

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like David is questioning Barry Greenstein's preparation of Mimi for this match.

Stork

05-17-2005, 10:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He also is now associated with The University of Alberta's excellent head up holdem computer program so who knows how much he has learned from that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can anyone elaborate on this program or give a link to something discussing/explaining it?

barycentric

05-17-2005, 10:13 PM

Google works well enough.

Beavis68

05-17-2005, 10:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I barely know Mimi so this is just speculation. But what I wanted to point out is that those who thought that Mimi should beat Daniel because of her success in big holdem games may have been missing something. And I do NOT mean that she isn't used to shorthanded or tough competition. But if she hasn't played much headsup there is one specific thing she isn't used to. Namely the small blind on the button.

Even if she has lots of three handed experience it doesn't matter much because of this difference. If the button folds and she is the small blind it is correct to fold a lot more hands than it would be if you had position. A lot more. As far as raising on the button, in a three handed game, you are risking four to win three and have two opponents to contend with. Head up you are risking three to win three and are against only one opponent.

Carrying this further we see that the big blind in a three handed game can assume a bit more of a hand from the button than heads up. This allows more folds on the flop after calling a raise. In fact it allows you to avoid flops where you have absolutely nothing. But you can't do that playing headup against a headup expert. If the button has two blank cards and always raises preflop and bets the flop he will break about even against a big blind who always need something to continue on.

Ironically there is a lot of math in headup, just as in full games. There is less math in shorthanded. But in headup there are so many little pots where both players have nothing and a bluffer is getting 4-1 or so a full analysis of those situations is needed to handle them right. If Mimi didn't do this analysis but merely tried to transfer her skills as a shorthanded player to this match she was in trouble. (Again I know little about her. Maybe she has played a lot of head up. Maybe she has done extensive analysis.) Because Daniel, you can be sure, has thought a lot along these lines. He like to downplay math in his writings but I have talked to him and know better. He also is now associated with The University of Alberta's excellent head up holdem computer program so who knows how much he has learned from that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too me, you look quite pathetic commenting on a game you won't play. Put up or shut up.

mmbt0ne

05-17-2005, 10:28 PM

You're right. No more hand analysis unless you play at those limits. That should help the boards along nicely.

TimTimSalabim

05-17-2005, 10:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you honestly thing she didn't understand the game she way playing?

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like David is questioning Barry Greenstein's preparation of Mimi for this match.

[/ QUOTE ]

Barry would have had to consider her a dog anyways (from his own website ratings):

Mimi:

Aggressiveness: 8
Looseness: 4
Short-handed: 7
Limit: 7
No-limit: 6
Tournaments: 7
Side games: 7
Steam control: 3
Against weak players: 7
Against strong players: 6

Daniel:
Aggressiveness: 7
Looseness: 7
Short-handed: 8
Limit: 8
No-limit: 8
Tournaments: 9
Side games: 7
Steam control: 7
Against weak players: 8
Against strong players: 7

Jordan Olsommer

05-17-2005, 10:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Because Daniel, you can be sure, has thought a lot along these lines. He like to downplay math in his writings but I have talked to him and know better. He also is now associated with The University of Alberta's excellent head up holdem computer program so who knows how much he has learned from that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I suspected all that crap he says about "throw away your books and give me a 5-3 offsuit any day of the week!" was just image. Funny how for a guy who's so savvy when it comes to promotion (not saying that's a bad thing, I'm just saying he's very good at it), I hadn't heard a single word about his association with the U of Alberta until your post.

Vincent Lepore

05-17-2005, 10:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
a full analysis of those situations is needed to handle them right. If Mimi didn't do this analysis but merely tried to transfer her skills as a shorthanded player

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess is that this is the heart of the matter. Not many, if any, would go through the type of anlaysis Sklansky is alluding too. I bet she didn't either. If she is a short handed expert and not a heads up expert she would have had to start doing this type of analysis quite a bit in advance to fully grasp the math side of Heads-up play. Since Daniel just recently made this challenege I doubt she had time or even the inclination to study headsup play. That said I must admit that I do not know Mimi and am not sure that she didn't bone up before playing. Just a guess.

Vince

the shadow

05-17-2005, 11:15 PM

DS is referring to Poker Academy (http://www.poki-poker.com/) by Darse Billings and his crew from U. of Alberta. IMHO, the "pro" version is worth it. YMMV.

Paradigm

05-17-2005, 11:17 PM

Who cares if Wynn is staking DN? What's the big deal? In the end, wouldn't the more important issue be the victor? We're not on Fossilman' case for being staked in the WSOP -- I highly doubt that if DN is staked, it can tend his play so that he might be more of a dog.

TransientR

05-17-2005, 11:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a full analysis of those situations is needed to handle them right. If Mimi didn't do this analysis but merely tried to transfer her skills as a shorthanded player

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess is that this is the heart of the matter. Not many, if any, would go through the type of anlaysis Sklansky is alluding too. I bet she didn't either. If she is a short handed expert and not a heads up expert she would have had to start doing this type of analysis quite a bit in advance to fully grasp the math side of Heads-up play. Since Daniel just recently made this challenege I doubt she had time or even the inclination to study headsup play. That said I must admit that I do not know Mimi and am not sure that she didn't bone up before playing. Just a guess.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok,

So Barry Greenstein (who probably staked Mimi heavily) and Mimi herself, risked a half million against Negreanu without understanding some of the fundamentals of heads-up play? I don't believe it, either that or Barry isn't as bright as many here (or he himself) thinks.

And yes, I agree with the posters who point out that Sklansky's pointificating on a contest that he himself declined to enter (even at a fraction of the stake Barry/Mimi put up), sounds a bit like the Wizard of Oz.

Frank

Stork

05-17-2005, 11:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
DS is referring to Poker Academy (http://www.poki-poker.com/) by Darse Billings and his crew from U. of Alberta. IMHO, the "pro" version is worth it. YMMV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, ty. I've seen that before, had no idea DN was associated with it though.

Barycentric, you could learn a thing or two about posting from the shadow.

MaxPower

05-18-2005, 12:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
David-

For lack of a better expression, duh.

Yes, that is heads up poker. Anyone with even a remedial understand of nature of heads up poker understands these basic concepts. I can't imagine Mimi Tran went into a game of heads up limit poker with absolutely no idea of the fundementals of the game.

The reality is heads up is far different from ultra short and you need to push small edges and draws hard. While I know nothing of Mimi Tran, I do know she plays regularly online heads up and short handed.

If she honestly play as "a big blind who always need something to continue on" then she would be giving the game away. I can't imagine that someone who is even moderately intelligent wouldn't recognize this. Clearly she is going to reraise liberally from the BB, play unimproved A-x hard, and make all the other necessary adjustments for heads up limit holdem.

Your comment seems tantamount to saying, "maybe she didn't understand the game she was playing." Because the items you've pointed out are as basic as they come in heads up limit holdem.

Do you honestly thing she didn't understand the game she way playing?

-srw

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you ever consider that there are some people who read this forum who do not know these thing? Why would Sklansky address his post to those who already know these concepts?

I don't think his point was that Tran doesn't understand the basic of heads-up poker. It was simply that Daniel could know the mathematics involved in some of the post-flop situations somewhat better than her.

theBruiser500

05-18-2005, 01:49 AM

dan slansky, you should post some sample hands where you are playing HU and go into some of the math of hte situation would be very interesting

Vincent Lepore

05-18-2005, 01:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the posters who point out that Sklansky's pointificating

[/ QUOTE ]

Sklansky is pontificating by pointing out why Daniel may have been a favorite? OK I don't get it but o.k. What makes you think that Barry Greenstein is a Heads-up expert? Besides we are not talking fundamentals. The math of situational analysis heads-up might be the most important aspect of this type of play. Not that it is extremely complicated but it is significant and might require more than just a cursory review to learn enough to compete on Negreanu's level. I'm not positive that this is the case, again just a guess.

That Sklansky guy does have a big ego, though. But I don't think he believes he's the Pope. Heck I don't think he's even Catholic.

Vince

yct

05-18-2005, 02:08 AM

I think you should play Daniel. Just imagine how many more books you would've sold if you beat him... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

csuf_gambler

05-18-2005, 02:13 AM

mr. sklansky needs to man up and play daniel negrenu.

David Sklansky

05-18-2005, 02:45 AM

"Clearly she is going to reraise liberally from the BB, play unimproved A-x hard"

I wasn't talking about hands where you have an ace. If the button raises and the big blind calls and then checks, the button has lots of earn betting nothing if the big blind needs a pair, any draw, OR an ace to call.

David Sklansky

05-18-2005, 02:54 AM

"Too me, you look quite pathetic commenting on a game you won't play. Put up or shut up."

I'm guessing that if I told Daniel I would watch a match of his from beginning to end, make notes and give him my comments and analysis afterwards, but only if he paid me a thousand dollars, he would do it. You evidently wouldn't pay a penny. Which is why your poker future is almost certainly dismal.

citanul

05-18-2005, 02:59 AM

DS,

a) you need to learn to start writing "pwned" or something at the end of a post as good as that

b) i suspect he'd pay way more than that, and that you'd probably want more than that, since your time is worth more.

citanul, who's surprised that a discussion that's sort of exactly produced in your books is garnering this much non-understanding.

RoboRob

05-18-2005, 03:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
DS,

a) you need to learn to start writing "pwned" or something at the end of a post as good as that

b) i suspect he'd pay way more than that, and that you'd probably want more than that, since your time is worth more.

citanul, who's surprised that a discussion that's sort of exactly produced in your books is garnering this much non-understanding.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's great, i'm lol

theBruiser500

05-18-2005, 03:12 AM

slansky why no response to me?

Vincent Lepore

05-18-2005, 04:09 AM

I made this reply in another thread on the news forum. It applies here. I stand by my comments. There is no way that Sklansky is not a favorite over Negreanu in a heads-up match in most poker games. And Sklansky knows it!

"An accomplished NL player almost certinly understands the math of the game better than the accomplished limit player. But heads-up experience probably tips the scale towards the limit player. But I bet not by much. As for Sklansky and other math types (known to be limit experts) that thouroughly understand the math of all poker situations they might have a big edge heads-up. Despite what Sklansky is saying he is probably a favorite in most types of poker games (heads-up) against Negreanu. As is Andy Bloch, Fossilman, Greenstein, Baldwin, Malmuth, Brier (Holdem), Lederrer, Reese and some othes. As for the math expertise of these fellows, I know a few of them personally but Reese, Bloch, Baldwin, Greenstein and Lederrer I only know by reputation."

Vince

NLSoldier

05-18-2005, 04:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
slansky why no response to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe because you called him dan?

felson

05-18-2005, 05:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
slansky why no response to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe because you called him dan?

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe because he called him slansky?

Jordan Olsommer

05-18-2005, 05:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
slansky why no response to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe because you called him dan?

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe because he called him slansky?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe that's his secret identity for when he wants to play other high-profile poker players heads up.

He's all "no, I'm not going to do it", but on the date the match was to be scheduled, guess who shows up - DAN SLANSKY!

...and nobody would be the wiser. He'd be a Bizarro-Sklansky, like in the old Superman comic books.

Jordan Olsommer

05-18-2005, 05:41 AM

http://img286.echo.cx/img286/5656/03theoryofpoker8bz.jpg

srw5n

05-18-2005, 07:29 AM

Again. yes. obviously. My intention was never to explain any situation that one would need to continue from the BB (or for that matter how often one who lead out with nothing, checkraise with nothing, semibluff, etc). Rather, to merely state that your commentary was tantamount to to a blanket statement, "Daniel may have been a favorite, because Mimi didn't know what game they were playing."

I don't think this is accurate.

GFunk911

05-18-2005, 08:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Who cares if Wynn is staking DN? What's the big deal? In the end, wouldn't the more important issue be the victor? We're not on Fossilman' case for being staked in the WSOP -- I highly doubt that if DN is staked, it can tend his play so that he might be more of a dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I would care, because the most interesting angle here is that he is willing to play for hundreds of thousands of dollars against all comers in a wide selection of games. While who wins is certainly very interesting, heads up freezeouts with a relatively small stack:blind ratio are mostly luck when two excellent players are playing. Who wins does not prove anything.

Both who wins and the money at stake are interesting. If the money isn't his that angle is shot.

drewjustdrew

05-18-2005, 09:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who cares if Wynn is staking DN? What's the big deal? In the end, wouldn't the more important issue be the victor? We're not on Fossilman' case for being staked in the WSOP -- I highly doubt that if DN is staked, it can tend his play so that he might be more of a dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I would care, because the most interesting angle here is that he is willing to play for hundreds of thousands of dollars against all comers in a wide selection of games. While who wins is certainly very interesting, heads up freezeouts with a relatively small stack:blind ratio are mostly luck when two excellent players are playing. Who wins does not prove anything.

Both who wins and the money at stake are interesting. If the money isn't his that angle is shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

The money at stake is not very interesting at all. The interesting part is the competition and he is not going to get top players to play without making it worth their while.

Nottom

05-18-2005, 10:22 AM

TheShootah

05-18-2005, 10:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
DS,
a) you need to learn to start writing "pwned" or something at the end of a post as good as that

[/ QUOTE ]

sexypanda

05-18-2005, 11:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
DS,
a) you need to learn to start writing "pwned" or something at the end of a post as good as that

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

...or maybe:

http://img59.exs.cx/img59/1992/brilliant7lb.jpg

VoraciousReader

05-18-2005, 11:32 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I'm guessing that if I told Daniel I would watch a match of his from beginning to end, make notes and give him my comments and analysis afterwards, but only if he paid me a thousand dollars, he would do it. You evidently wouldn't pay a penny. Which is why your poker future is almost certainly dismal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please provide link to the website where we can take advantage of THIS open offer. MUCH more appealing than HU vs DN. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

cwsiggy

05-18-2005, 11:35 AM

That term may not be in use anymore. Does anyone know what Antonios's Rocks and Rings "posse" says now?????

Zygote

05-18-2005, 11:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
"Too me, you look quite pathetic commenting on a game you won't play. Put up or shut up."

I'm guessing that if I told Daniel I would watch a match of his from beginning to end, make notes and give him my comments and analysis afterwards, but only if he paid me a thousand dollars, he would do it. You evidently wouldn't pay a penny. Which is why your poker future is almost certainly dismal.

[/ QUOTE ]

In hopes that you'd seriously consider doing this, I would be interested in a similar offer. PM me if you're looking for a 30/60 student.

andyfox

05-18-2005, 11:52 AM

Botta-boom, botta-bang.

Your writing has improved markedly over the past couple of years. Which is why my poker future is almost certainly not dismal.

Thanks.

Voltron87

05-18-2005, 12:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"Too me, you look quite pathetic commenting on a game you won't play. Put up or shut up."

I'm guessing that if I told Daniel I would watch a match of his from beginning to end, make notes and give him my comments and analysis afterwards, but only if he paid me a thousand dollars, he would do it. You evidently wouldn't pay a penny. Which is why your poker future is almost certainly dismal.

[/ QUOTE ]

David, you should be above insulting posters who post ignorant things on your site. It really makes you look bad when you do stuff like that. If a poster makes a stupid comment like "oh you don't play the big game why should I listen to you" just ignore it. It is + reputation EV.