Accepting Daniel's Odds

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one that thinks Ego is what it's all about with these challenges?

and if so .... what do the stakes matter?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I were offering an open headsup challenge for the purpose of feeding my ego, I'd be sure to make the stakes such that I really brought my A-game.

Daniel said in his blog that he's doing this, mostly, for the sake of gambling. That's his privelege. Sklansky appears to be totally gamble-averse and his efforts to make it seem otherwise are a little pathetic.


Come on David, have some fun. Don't come out with absurd offers for a 10K freezout, it's unbecoming.

[ QUOTE ]
From what I understand, Stu Ungar had a big Ego and
he died broke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you asserting that a poker player will die broke if he has a big ego? Read up on Stuey a little--he had some other problems that may have hastened his demise.

Shane

[lastchance]

Yeah, Ungar had a lot more problems than a big ego.

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would Daniel want to spend 10 hours playing to win 10,000 dollars when that is like one big bet in his 4000- 8000 game.

[/ QUOTE ]

The obvious answer is less than a 0.125 BB/hr winner in his 4000-8000 game.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's assuming he wins the match. For example, if he's a 0.1 BB/hr winner at 4K/8K then he needs to have a 90% chance of winning a ten-hour 10K freezeout to have the same hourly earn.

With the 10K to 9K idea, he'd need to be around 94.7%. Obviously he's not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not true that

A) Daniel is contractually obligated to spend a lot of hours at the Wynn
B) The Wynn does not spread any 4000-8000 games
and
C) David has offered to play the freezeout at the Wynn

If all of those conditions are true, then your comparison is useless.

[David Sklansky]

I'm still willing to take 50-40. Meanwhile you guys are still confused. None of my "counter offers" am I anxious to play. Volatility and the value of my time make them no big deal. They are simply statements of my minimum requirements to those on this forum who might have thought I felt like I was a significant underdog.

[TheStew]

I agree, Sklanksy your a joke. Nothing but a math geek just like those guys in high school that thought their super duper watch calculator could solve all of their social problems. You could never compete consistently in high stakes tournaments like Daniel and you cant beat the big games or else you would already be there doing it. Guess the math doesnt come out right for you to ante up to the big game? And to all of you sklansky worshipers, I'm not claiming to be the best...sklansky could whoop my azz in poker but at least I know when to admit it. Anyone who wants to know more about poker than 10 + J = 20 should go to a real site. Ive had it with this middle school of a web site. Peace.

[2+2 wannabe]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree, Sklanksy your a joke. Nothing but a math geek just like those guys in high school that thought their super duper watch calculator could solve all of their social problems. You could never compete consistently in high stakes tournaments like Daniel and you cant beat the big games or else you would already be there doing it. Guess the math doesnt come out right for you to ante up to the big game? And to all of you sklansky worshipers, I'm not claiming to be the best...sklansky could whoop my azz in poker but at least I know when to admit it. Anyone who wants to know more about poker than 10 + J = 20 should go to a real site. Ive had it with this middle school of a web site. Peace.

[/ QUOTE ]

you have 5 posts [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

p.s. i'm sure david is sad about you leeching off the site without contributing

[Gigabet]

[ QUOTE ]

And to those who think the 10-9 negates a significant skill difference, I also offered to LAY those same odds (10K to 9 K playing the same game) to anybody (other than Daniel) who criticized me (up to this point of course) on any of the threads involving this subject.




[/ QUOTE ]

Which thread am i supposed to criticize you on to get this deal?

[yct]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still willing to take 50-40. Meanwhile you guys are still confused. None of my "counter offers" am I anxious to play. Volatility and the value of my time make them no big deal. They are simply statements of my minimum requirements to those on this forum who might have thought I felt like I was a significant underdog.

[/ QUOTE ]

If $100K was too much for your bankroll, I could understand. But from your post above, it seems like you certainly could afford the $100K. I think it was a better idea not even to make the $10K offer, because it really is a weak, and laughable come back effort.

[palman]

Well here's nothing for a first post on 2 + 2, but this is just absurd.

50-40 in a heads up match? Obviously I understand you're just angle-shooting for the eventual match, jockeying for position for the best +EV situation, etc.

You mention over and over that you take greater pride in being more mathematically or logically sound than other players (e.g. Daniel) and that is all that matters to you.

But fact of that matter is you are in the business of selling poker books. 99% of your potential customers don't care about your given superior skills in technical games that no one plays. In fact, if these games were the ones that were the most popular, you couldn't make a living selling books and this site wouldn't exist. The most mathematically sound would win much more often that 99% of the public wouldn't have a chance, and wouldn't be able to learn to have a chance.

I've always loved your books, and they have helped me greatly. But upon lurking on 2 + 2 I was severely turned off by your massive ego. Based on both conjecture and what others have said, these feelings are not those of a great minority. Everyone loves watching someone with egomaniacal tendencies fall, and whether true or not, in the minds of most reading this whole saga, you have fallen. If you knew nothing about poker and were told to learn from someone asking for 50-40 odds in a heads up match, what would your first thought be?

You're In the business of poker, and like it or not, that no longer means Hi-Lo games with no qualifier, or anything close to it.

I wouldn't fault anyone for not wanting to risk the absurd amounts of money Daniel wants to play, but I wouldn't expect someone without the money or even ability to obtain backers In such a supposed "+EV" situation to be so egomaniacal. Saying that you with your superior mathematical mind can't be a favorite when you can choose between any of 10 games, and that even with getting odds you don't jump on the chance looks bad. No matter what logic you give, it looks bad.

You don't sell enough books to claim that $500/hr is not worth your time, and saying you don't need to prove anything to anyone by playing isn't what your target market believes.

Image value is clearly +EV here, because your target market feels Daniel is god at the tables, and it wouldn't adversely affect your image. Winning would do wonders for the crowd that wonders why you haven't been winning tournaments.

[hotdog da 2rd]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who wants to know more about poker than 10 + J = 20 should go to a real site. Ive had it with this middle school of a web site. Peace.

[/ QUOTE ]

until i can figure out why 10 + J = 20, i'll take your advise into consideration. thx for coming.