Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

....is here.

I am going to bed now, but will post my thoughts in the morning. In the meantime, discuss amongst yourselves.

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

in a sense negreanu is right. if that is how the rules were set up that is how it should be. allowing espn 5 or so exemptions would not really be a bad thing especially for tv ratings but they should have put that in the rules in advance

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

Here is the full link.

My opinion is that it really isn't that big of a modification to add three players to the event. Yes, you cost people $500 in equity. That isn't chump change, but its not grand larceny either. When I first started reading the blog entry, I figured they cancelled the tournament. DN's sense of outrage was totally over the top.

Obviously, this is just amateur psychoanalysis, but it seems possible that Daniel's take may have something to do with not being added himself.

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

If I were Bob Hume, Harry Cullen Jr., Corey Bierra, Jonathan Schecter, Don Mullis, or any of the several others, I would pull out of the $2M freeroll in protest.

Plus, the never of Harrah's not inviting the defending champion, the player's player, Annie Duke. When will the injustice end.

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

[ QUOTE ]
in a sense negreanu is right. if that is how the rules were set up that is how it should be. allowing espn 5 or so exemptions would not really be a bad thing especially for tv ratings but they should have put that in the rules in advance

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2006 TOC will have 6 ESPN exemptions (as well as the 12 WSOPC ME winners + WSOP ME final table) for a total of 27 players.

I like how Negreanu mentions the "lesser" players by name, not bothering to mention Lederer, Ivey, Ferguson, Matusow, etc. also lose their $500 in equity. Will Negreanu and his poker agent be be the ones leading the effort to "unionize" the poker players?

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

bfd. he's just jealous he wasn't invited.

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the full link.

My opinion is that it really isn't that big of a modification to add three players to the event. Yes, you cost people $500 in equity. That isn't chump change, but its not grand larceny either. When I first started reading the blog entry, I figured they cancelled the tournament. DN's sense of outrage was totally over the top.

Obviously, this is just amateur psychoanalysis, but it seems possible that Daniel's take may have something to do with not being added himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he is angry because its not just a 500 loss in equity, but these players arent exactly going to just show up and give up their chips. Its not like they added 3 amateurs.

All 3 of these guys have a real shot at winning and if one were to win, it would be specially annoying because he wasnt supposed to be in the damn tourney in the first place. Thats why his anger is justified.

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update... *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by Dynasty

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

[ QUOTE ]
quote deleted by Dynasty

[/ QUOTE ]

Use a little imagination. While this doesn't affect him directly, it is representative of a class of problems that can come up with the WPT, WSOP etc.; that is to say, management making decisions that promote their bottom line at the expense of poker players in the event. This change is clearly much more minor than some, but if such a thing becomes acceptable then there might be problems. In this way, it's quite similar to his complaint about the 2006 WSOP schedule, or other objections (not necessarily by Negreanu) that have been raised before about forbidding deals, etc.

Re: Negreanu\'s latest blog update...
 

[ QUOTE ]
in a sense negreanu is right. if that is how the rules were set up that is how it should be. allowing espn 5 or so exemptions would not really be a bad thing especially for tv ratings but they should have put that in the rules in advance

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm willing to bet Harrah's and ESPN have some pretty good lawyers, made sure the Ts were crossed and the Is were dotted, and gave themselves the right to add exemptions if they so choose.