DN's comments on his match and an interesting thought

[TransientR]

I agree. Daniel doesn't come across unlikable here. And he had good things to say about his opponent. But he was frustrated by the way the cards ran and talked about it. Hardly a crime.

Frank

[jojobinks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That last post really brings to focus how much more like hellmuth he is becoming. With every pseudo compliment he gives oppenheim, there is always an included jab. Either he is indirectly insulting oppenheim by claiming that stakes were so small he doesnt care if he wins or loses, or he chalks oppenheims winning as luck, or an extremely lucky streak.

[/ QUOTE ]

He has said numerous times that he thought he was a dog. He's been very clear about that. He also said Oppenheim caught some good cards. The two statements are not conflicting. If you just played someone for 200k and the deck hit him in the face, you'd probably talk about it too. He makes pains to say even though Oppenheim got lucky, DN thinks he got outplayed as well. Yeah maybe he could have talked about the luck a little yes, but I didn't see this post as nutzoid-central.

[/ QUOTE ]

i like the guy, but i know poker players too well to believe what he writes. the facts: DN and DO had a heads up limit HE match, and DO won.

everything else, most especially the number of times DO had nasty suckouts, should be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism.

i'm to believe from his blog, for instance that DN flopped about 10 sets that were sucked out on. sorry, i don't buy it. that post was a face-saver; that's cool, it's what we do when we lose.

[Fallen Hero]

If he was telling it to me in first person I would probably doubt it too, but I find it hard to believe someone as famous in the poker world as DN would make up hands to write in his blog (specially knowing there are friends of DO who are regulars at his forum/site).

BTW: it seems clear to me from this discussion that people actually try to find things to dislike about "celebrities", DN comes across in this post as someone upset about the way cards ran but also understanding he was an underdog and was outplayed...how many of us after catching a bad run of cards for 200k would stop to think about the way certain hands were played to see if we actually deserved to win the match?

[jojobinks]

in person or not, he mucks his cards when he loses (i imagine) and he can claim he held whatever he likes. it's what poker players do.

i don't dislike him. i don't look for reasons to dislike him. i find myself rooting for him. but i think that he's not very reflective about how he presents himself.

[NoRiverRats]

JoJo's comments make the most sense to me - I think DN seems like a good guy who lost his first big challenge by being outplayed and yes, sucked out on a couple times. But hey, its poker and suckouts happen. I don't think he complained overly about them, and likewise you can't expect him to ignore they happened. He told the story fairly. I hope all his critics will be equally generous when he wins one of his challenges, which he will likely do in the near future.

Thanks DN for challenging the best, playing the best and telling us about it, warts and all. Keep it up.

[keats]

Not to mention if Daniel just put in his blog I played DO and lost. Everyone would e mail his asking for more details they want to know what happened and so on and so forth. To me Daniel posting those hands is just adding some actaul Poker content to his blog.

[sprfcta]

DN's hands were reported contemperaneously on the FCP forum.