Negreanu's latest blog update... - Page 5

Voltron87 · #41 11-07-2005, 11:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and to all of you who posted that this change was no big deal, or such a small thing that it shouldn't matter, please remind me of this fact the next time we meet in person. I'd like to take your wallet, remove $500, and then return it, and see if it's still a minor issue not worth talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is truly an awful analogy.

I really don't see how this is that big of a deal, whoever is running is doing this as a freeroll so they are well withing their rights to tinker with it. Especially considering what they are doing is so minor. This is a non-issue.

gobboboy · #42 11-07-2005, 12:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and to all of you who posted that this change was no big deal, or such a small thing that it shouldn't matter, please remind me of this fact the next time we meet in person. I'd like to take your wallet, remove $500, and then return it, and see if it's still a minor issue not worth talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is truly an awful analogy.

I really don't see how this is that big of a deal, whoever is running is doing this as a freeroll so they are well withing their rights to tinker with it. Especially considering what they are doing is so minor. This is a non-issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, how about THIS analogy:

Willy Wonka's chocolate factory is opening its doors to 5 lucky children! All you have to do is find one of the five golden tickets. No one else has been in the factory for years. You are promised a lifetime supply of chocolate if you can eat the most chocolate bars at the factory. Essentially, going in, you have 1/5 of a lifetime supply of chocolate.

However, Willy Wonka realizes there are a few gluttons out there who, thanks to participating in 1/4 of the total Wonka sales, are invited to the factory regardless of whether or not they find a ticket. Your equity, along with decreasing, now has some very tough competitors and your chances of winning are VASTLY decreased. Would you have tried to get the golden ticket knowing that you would have to beat the best in the world? Maybe not as much.

Yuv · #43 11-07-2005, 12:08 PM

Pick your battles. Sure, if I was running ESPN, I would announce in advance that minor lineup addons are possible. They didn't. They messed up a bit.

They will mess up a hell of alot more in the future and they messed up a hell of alot more in the past. Pick your battles. This isn't importent enough.

(but, nonetheless, I don't think there's any dispute about the fact that DN/Shane/Greg are right. Things aren't perfect in the world, nor are they in poker. This is just not importent enough to dwell on)

BarronVangorToth · #44 11-07-2005, 12:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]

They will mess up a hell of alot more in the future and they messed up a hell of alot more in the past. Pick your battles. This isn't importent enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is of X importance. The next thing is of X+1 importance ... which is "not really much more important than X, so why bother?" ... X+2 ... X+3 ... X+100.

Eventually, you have to make a stand.

At what amount is shoplifting not a crime? $15 CD? $7 paperback? $1 can of soda?

Right is right, whatever the degree.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

Voltron87 · #45 11-07-2005, 12:13 PM

That's a more accurate analogy, but you do change the math from losing 6% or so of your equity to 20%.

I rally really really can't understand why this has gotten such a strong reaction. Is there some history about this I don't know which is why people are ready to slam the organizers over anything? I don't read this forum often.

Yuv · #46 11-07-2005, 12:14 PM

That is a very naive approach to life and one who will get zero results.

Easy E · #47 11-07-2005, 12:27 PM

This is two years in a row that Danny started whining when he didn't get invited.

<font color="blue">Had they said this, "20 players will qualify at 5 different locations along with the 9 final table members from the main event and anyone who has more that 8 WSOP bracelets," then who could have a beef with that?

Since they didn't, how do you explain to the other players that they while they thought they only had to face 108 other players, that oh, by the way, you'll also have to face Doyle, Johnny, and Phil? How do you explain to them that you promised them $18,350 in equity, but that at the last minute you took about $500 out of their pocket and only give them $17, 850 in equity?</font>

As if that $500 in equity would have changed anyone's choice in trying to qualify?

Nice misdirection, Danny, but no go.

While I don't like the exeptions, I can see how the network didn't want to cut their own "equity" by including those three.

Easy E · #48 11-07-2005, 12:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and to all of you who posted that this change was no big deal, or such a small thing that it shouldn't matter, please remind me of this fact the next time we meet in person. I'd like to take your wallet, remove $500, and then return it, and see if it's still a minor issue not worth talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if extra qualifying rounds would have been added and 3 more would have qualified legally, you still would have complained?

No, FossilMan, you can't convince me the $500 loss in average equity would have made a difference in your decision, or others, to participate in this freeroll.

Easy E · #49 11-07-2005, 12:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Okay, how about THIS analogy:

Willy Wonka's chocolate factory is opening its doors to 5 lucky children! All you have to do is find one of the five golden tickets. No one else has been in the factory for years. You are promised a lifetime supply of chocolate if you can eat the most chocolate bars at the factory. Essentially, going in, you have 1/5 of a lifetime supply of chocolate.

However, Willy Wonka realizes there are a few gluttons out there who, thanks to participating in 1/4 of the total Wonka sales, are invited to the factory regardless of whether or not they find a ticket. Your equity, along with decreasing, now has some very tough competitors and your chances of winning are VASTLY decreased. Would you have tried to get the golden ticket knowing that you would have to beat the best in the world? Maybe not as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horsefeathers. Start arguing lottery equity next.

It was a FREEROLL.

VoraciousReader · #50 11-07-2005, 12:33 PM

I don't understand why there is not more outrage over this.

1) This is not a freeroll. The way this was structured, it's more like an event with a satellite tournament. Everybody buys in for $X, and the top 20 make the tournament. The fact that there was also prize money awarded does not change this. The TOC was part of the prize for reaching a certain place in the event.

2) If poker is a game of small edges, how much edge do you think Joe Schmo loses if an additional 2 percent are added to the 108 player field? How much more edge do you think he loses if those players are Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan, and Phil Hellmuth?

3) How would you feel if you were playing your WSOP super-satellite on Party Poker, and after you beat 100 people to win your place in the WSOP satellite, PP management announces that they're going to add Phil Ivey, Fossilman, and Dan Harrington to the pool of contestants?

4) It is not good for either poker or poker players to allow the management sponsoring an event to change the rules/prizes/terms AFTER everyone has bought in and played the event. In poker, you make your decision, you take your knocks, you learn your lesson, you do it differently next time. This is true for calling an EP raiser with A6o, and it should be true for the event sponsors as well.