Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

I think it is funny that while he says the side projects are a waste of time... he has a book coming out.

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

I agree, but I think guaranteed income is much smarter than playing poker for a living. Again, I dont know anything about playing poker on this level so I have no idea how big the edge someone could have over another actually is. Who knows, maybe Barry never loses and it would be a huge waste of time for him to endorse something that would be money in the bank. I highly, highly doubt this is the truth though. Everyone runs bad.

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is funny that while he says the side projects are a waste of time... he has a book coming out.

[/ QUOTE ]

He has mentioned that taking the time to put out the book has cost him potentially millions, since he had to be away from the games to write.

Can't really argue there.

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

I love Barry Greenstien!

[quote "The reason these other guys play in tournaments for the most part is because they are broke, because other people put them in a tournament and they've made a name for themselves. But they're not as good as many professionals out there."

... Howard Lederer raised his eyebrows and showed part of his famous weapons-grade stare, then somewhat backed up Greenstein's point.

"I had success in those biggest side games for 10 years," Lederer says. "I think I've gotten a lot of satisfaction and expanded my horizons a little bit and made a conscious decision.


So, indeed, there is truth in Greenstein's argument. Still sounds cranky.

"The crankiness is that for years I'd just bite my tongue when the media would talk about losing players being top players in the game," Greenstein said, preferring not to name names. "I'd say, 'OK, they don't know the difference.' And everything I'd read or see on the news is, from where I sit, false.

" 'Great' is given to people who aren't even winning poker players. So, if someone's not a winning player, and I'm being told that's a 'great' player, they're being put up as top professionals and 'This is how they act.' Then they act like goofballs, and I say, 'That's because they're not (top professionals). You've got the wrong people.'

"I'm almost defending the working poker players around the country and even around the world who make a living playing poker. There are many people who do that, but it's very expensive to go around and play in these tournaments and often not the right way to make their living. They live with their families, they play in the local clubs.

"On some levels, I'm arrogant. That level is, there are cash game players - and not only that but I play in the biggest cash game; what we call the first tier - and a lot of people don't appreciate what the level of differences are between us and people playing in tournaments."

"My crankiness is not for myself, because I have been given - whether I've deserved it or not - almost the best persona of any player in poker history," Greenstein says. "I'm defending other poker professionals."


[/ QUOTE ]
Far be it from me to put words in Mr G's mouth but I believe that he is sayinhg, in effect, that Tournaments ain't poker. Now where have I heard that before?

Vince

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

I saw Barry listed as 20/1 (tied for 13th) on that NBC Heads-up Poker Championship event while lots of others were listed at 12/1 (including Scott Fishman) and Negreanu was favorite at 9/1...

I guess Daniel could call Barry a 'live one' when it comes to tournaments.** (At least Barry was ahead of Hellmuth at 22/1).

** of course this is ridiculous

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

This should all be settled by a Heads Up match between Dn and BG. Loser had to admit that maybe just maybe there is an outside chance that they could of possibly been outplayed but that they aren't agreeing to that in writing just verbally.

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

I'm going nuts! I can't access ESPN's Web site from work... Anyone feel like copying and quoting the text in this thread? PLEEEEASE?

Oh, why thank you!

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

One match or two or 4 or 5 won't prove who the better poker player is. Successful Poker playing is decided over many, many hours of play. What you are asking could only be effectively accomplished in some sort of tournament format. In a tournament format DN clearly has the head-up advantage if for no other reason than experience. No the only way to prove what BG is claiming is for DN to play as many 4-8k hours as he can over the next year with a goal of 1500-2000 hours and log his results. If this whole shabang is just a shot at DN by BG, this is the only way to prove BG wrong.

Vince

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

Daniel did mention Barry wanted a piece of him heads up in 10 games for 500,000 each.

Re: \"They\'d be drawing dead.\" Barry G on tournament pros...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I love Barry Greenstien!

[quote "The reason these other guys play in tournaments for the most part is because they are broke, because other people put them in a tournament and they've made a name for themselves. But they're not as good as many professionals out there."

... Howard Lederer raised his eyebrows and showed part of his famous weapons-grade stare, then somewhat backed up Greenstein's point.

"I had success in those biggest side games for 10 years," Lederer says. "I think I've gotten a lot of satisfaction and expanded my horizons a little bit and made a conscious decision.


So, indeed, there is truth in Greenstein's argument. Still sounds cranky.

"The crankiness is that for years I'd just bite my tongue when the media would talk about losing players being top players in the game," Greenstein said, preferring not to name names. "I'd say, 'OK, they don't know the difference.' And everything I'd read or see on the news is, from where I sit, false.

" 'Great' is given to people who aren't even winning poker players. So, if someone's not a winning player, and I'm being told that's a 'great' player, they're being put up as top professionals and 'This is how they act.' Then they act like goofballs, and I say, 'That's because they're not (top professionals). You've got the wrong people.'

"I'm almost defending the working poker players around the country and even around the world who make a living playing poker. There are many people who do that, but it's very expensive to go around and play in these tournaments and often not the right way to make their living. They live with their families, they play in the local clubs.

"On some levels, I'm arrogant. That level is, there are cash game players - and not only that but I play in the biggest cash game; what we call the first tier - and a lot of people don't appreciate what the level of differences are between us and people playing in tournaments."

"My crankiness is not for myself, because I have been given - whether I've deserved it or not - almost the best persona of any player in poker history," Greenstein says. "I'm defending other poker professionals."


[/ QUOTE ]
Far be it from me to put words in Mr G's mouth but I believe that he is sayinhg, in effect, that Tournaments ain't poker. Now where have I heard that before?

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where you come up with this, Vince. Do you read poker articles specifically to find passages that can be taken out of context to support points you made months ago?

Greenstein is simply saying that the well-known tournament poker pros would not beat the biggest cash game. There is no discussion about the definition of poker, or whether or not tournament poker is actually poker.

NOTE: I'm going to make a preemptive strike and note that I did not insult you in this response...and if you find an insult you need to reread what I said.

Will