A new theory on Negraneau challenge matches

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can imagine is "damn, there must have been a way to learn whatever it is I'm learning for less than half a million bucks a pop."


[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting comment from a guy that everyone on this fourm claims plays to win tournaments and is not concerned moving up the ladder when in the money.

Vince

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? How does a desire to maximize EV by ignoring the small money (which slows down lots of other players below optimal playing speed) in pursuit of the bigger money seem to you at odds with a desire not to play HU games if one is -EV in them?

Seriously, do you have any idea what you're saying Vince? Or you just don't like PP?

[Smoothcall]

Showing me winning 600k on a weekend means nothing. there are big wins and losses in that game. and you showed he lost 400k too. so why show the 600k if your gonna show 400k loss? all your shwoing is typical wins and losses in the big game. Doesn't show skill it shows the swings. I didn't read the links you gave because i've seen most of them before. i may lok later but dont feel like rhashing them right now. but yeah i remember barry saying he was beating the 2-4k game he thinks. but it doesnt say the hours i dont think but could be wrong. what i want to see is the numbers when he lost his hige bankroll at the bellagio. The hourly must have been pretty low blowing hundreds of thousand in less than a year playing black chip games. Or maybe i'm wrong and losing all your money = winning money and beating the games.

No 4 million is not more than he's won in tournies. The reason that you are sure of this is the problem i have. the truth is you have no idea if he made more or less in tournies than that but said your sure he did becasue you want daniel to be winning in the live games. he made 4.5 mil last year alone in tournies.

Btw barry had played very little with daniel when he made his comments it was a guess. And it doesn't proved daniel consistently beat live games.

And i'm not saying any of this to fight with you. just trying to show you that its [possible he's not the great world class player you think. He could be. But he has not proven himself yet.

[Smoothcall]

I don't make claims unless there is proof. Daniel admits going broke. Go ask him if you don't believe me.

Oh so i get it. If Danny says he beat every game he is believed. If i say it noone will believe me. This is the problem i have. That just because someone with some fame says somthing you automatically believe it. but if anyone else says it. it is a lie.

I didn't ask vince to mention my ability and would rather he didn't. I'm not here to brag about my abilty. i'm just trying to say that just because danny had done well in tournies doesn't mean he is a great live poker player. i would rather let him prove that first before i say that is all. as when he's tried in the past he has failed.

[Smoothcall]

It looks like to me your doing a pretty good job yourself attacking vince and trying to bait him into a flamewar.

[Tom Martell]

[ QUOTE ]
It looks like to me your doing a pretty good job yourself attacking vince and trying to bait him into a flamewar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Monkey see, monkey do.

[Tom Martell]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, as far as your comment about enthusiasm goes, I'm not a rabid DN fanboy, so I don't think anything he does is automatically +EV, it just seems to me that these matches are in the bigger picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please define what you mean by +EV. It seems like you are saying they are actually -EV, but the money he is losing in EV he is actually consciously spending on utility (learning, fun, etc) such that it is a good expenditure. Therefore, his net utility is up, even if his expected return in dollars for his dollars is below even.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Where is your proof he bulit his bankroll playing live limit holdem? i believe this is a fabrication. i content he had nothing playing live and was in debt to friends. Until he pulled off these tournies in last couple years. You are just talking but not showing or saying anything.

Why am i an idiot if i question if he would have a higher hourly rate than me in my limit game? Because you believe him to be superman and are angry becasue i dare to question this? I don't care to get into an angry argument with you(not to mention the moderator doesn't like me. so i have to be careful when others like to yell and call me names i could get banned for your insults at me even if i respond in a civil manner like i am here). So if you want me continue to respond to your posts in the future please keep the idiot comments to a minimum. i figure for this one. you cant help yourself everybody likes to take a shot at me. especially when they know i'm not allowed to take a shot back or i will be banned.

So again where is your proof he would do better in my limit?

[/ QUOTE ]

Smoothcall,
This would be an excellent time to just ignore this guy's post and not respond.

[Your Mom]

[ QUOTE ]
true. the few tmes of heard him discuss live play though he sounds loose there as well. but your right possible just he noramlly plays solid.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Danny really likes to project a loose, anti -book reading image, when this isn't really how he plays.

[Your Mom]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not discrediting danny's skill because he won the money in tournaments. I'm saying he won it there and not in live games. So while one can argue that he may be a skillful tournament player and maybe as great as most think, but maybe just a good tourney player who ran real good. Howard lederer i think said this on that full tilt poker show. somthing to the effect he ran good at the right time.(maybe it was annie actually). that doesn't mean he is or isn't good. just means he ran good. But whther he is great tourney player, or good, or whatever has nothing to do with live game play. i think his live play is still unproven to go calling him world class. especially when all we know is about blowing big bankrolls. he may become great, time will tell. but right now i think its ridiculous for anyone, including himself, to say he is a world class live player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Smoothcall, I agree with this. However, there is no evidence to call Sklansky, Cooke, Malmuth, and the others you mentioned world class that haven't beaten the bigger games (at least 1000/2000, in my opinion) so it is hard to say that Danny would be a loser playing against these players.

[Your Mom]

Going broke doesn't mean he isn't good. How many times did Jen move up and then have to move down? According to her, a lot.