My Vision co-aligns with the end goal of DN's vision. DN just does not include "A world where the game is safe, secure and honest." IMO this is the most important priority for poker.

tbh I'm glad I started the fact checking to get his azz of his high horse and still on page 1 and under an hour. Guy lacks stamina.

so one of the most well-known pro poker players signs up here and starts a thread to talk about the health of the game and the most important thing you guys think of to bring up is Jen's laptop and Erik Lindgren?

go troll BBV.

I actually agree that top pros should behave as DN suggests if their wish is to maximize long term winrate. However, I think otherwise it is a silly way for most of us to behave. I am not at the table to belittle myself by doing a song and dance for a fish in order to take some of his money; I play poker first because I like the competition/sweat and second because it pays my expenses. In my early poker years, I was often rude to pros and fish alike when a hand played out differently than I thought it "should". Now I realize there is no "should" and can't recall the last time I berated anyone or even felt anger with regard to a poker hand. This is a state of mind that hopefully everyone develops as his view of poker matures. In other words I definitely don't view myself as one of the kids with internet background who is outright bad for the game. Outside of respecting chosen actions in poker hands, however, I still find it tedious to be overly polite to fish.

They aren't held accountable for their behavior to the degree that they should be. When the action has long since folded to them but they finish telling their neighbor a story, before slowly sweating each hole card one at a time, then deliberating another 30 seconds before deciding whether to open, then fumbling around for a while before splashing the pot with a combination of chips that is not logical for their announced bet size, the reaction shouldn't be silence and a couple of eye rolls; it should probably be a significant penalty. I think if you want to play poker tournaments, you should be responsible (in proportion to the buyin size) for things like knowing the rules, acting when it's your turn, not physically threatening other players, having some idea of how to you want to play preflop when the action is folded to you in early stages, etc. Because these experiences are so common when playing against fish, I actually prefer competing against "bad" pros. I care much more about being happy and immersed in the competition when I play than a few $ in EV.

Recreational players love to donate to DN and other TV pros, and like he says, enjoy it when he plays wildly and gives action. When random internet kids mess around in a lower stakes live game and play fast and loose, recreational players actually get upset and are likely to leave, even if the kid is very polite. A great deal of DN's winrate comes from maximizing value vs. fish using his image which perhaps is natural or perhaps he's worked carefully to cultivate. The problem is it's not possible to turn oneself into DN in any realistic period of time, if ever. And most of us who don't gain much from chatting it up in the short run are going to continue to rationalize that the supply of fish is relatively sustainable and we aren't that snowflake that causes the avalanche.

Oh because of the hacking thing? My position is that if people aren't comfortable staying at that hotel based on what happened last year they have plenty of other options including AB Skipper and surrounding hotels. I'm not judging people's personal decision as to where they feel comfortable staying, but I personally don't think the issue warrants boycotting the live tournaments because of a cyber attack at the hotel. Just my opinion of course.

Not sure about anyone else but it tickles me to see Negreanu posting on an account titled 'newbie'

Great thread.

Do you think you could beat the 40/80 LHE at bellagio for 1BB though if you played a lot of hours as an experiment?

I could issue a long response to everything you said, but I want to just address one in particular. I think a penalty is the wrong approach, and I also think it's a huge mistake to tell a rich, rank beginner who wants to sit in a $10k buy in event that he needs to have a full understanding of all the rules etc. I get it can be annoying, but the types of players who do this rarely win, and scaring them off by taking the rules too seriously is a mistake IMO. I think a much better approach is to kindly tell the guy at the end of the hand. Use humor, smile, and let him know. Like, "Buddy, love the story and all that but time is money my man." Or any errors he makes, point them out to him and actually help him learn.

The idea that for a high buy in event, we don't want beginners fumbling with their chips and being a bit clueless seems counter intuitive.

I believe quite strongly that I would beat the game. It was my bread and butter for many years and I have lots of confidence that I could do quite well. I'm unsure if $80 an hour is still possible without strict game selection though,

I'm only going to say this to you once. If you would like to have open discussions that are based on what we can do to improve the game, or if you have questions for me that you feel you need answered, I'm happy to engage. If your motivation is to attack me, and that's the assumption I'm making based on the tone of the past few of your posts, then I will simply ignore you. I have nothing to defend. I came here to discuss my points of view on where I think poker could use a boost. You are free to disagree, free to ask questions, but again, if you are going the sarcastic, negative route, I won't respond to any of your posts. It's totally up to you. You get to choose.

You can ask me about Edog, you can ask me about Barcelona, you can ask me whatever you like as long as your motivation and tone stay positive.

+1
owned

Are there any factors on the horizon that can reverse the trend of nationalized, segmented internet poker?

Thanks for stopping by again Daniel.

DN, how did you manage to quote his post and yet not answer his question? You got skill.

This. Seriously. It's no wonder people like DN decide to stop posting on here. For crying out loud. It's like these guys are sitting in their mother's basement or something, bragging to their friends about how "they told DN...on an internet forum."

DN - appreciate the topic. I can only speak for myself and the limited experience I have with playing with a few pros here and there (mostly in tournaments). I always enjoy playing with the ones that are friendlier, and they probably learn a lot more about my game through the conversation/banter/etc.. The ones that have come across as condescending don't make me want to stop playing the game, but they do make me want to become better so I can wipe that stupid smirk off their face the next time we sit down at a table together. But, I am very competitive in nature and most recreational players I am sure feel uncomfortable with this kind of thing.

I also agree with what someone wrote earlier that the televised tournaments are becoming far too analytical and would actually serve this purpose a lot more effectively by reaching back out to the masses and appealing more to the casual poker fan. The WSOP was really good at this the year of Moneymaker and the 1-2 years after that. But, now it really seems to be missing that vibe that appeals to the recreational amateur that might make he/she think they have a legitimate chance of hitting a big score.

I think Daniel is the best ambassador that poker has and he is absolutely right that being sociable at the table is best for the game. How could anyone disagree with that?

I wasn't trolling when I mentioned Barcelona. I only brought it up because I do actually think he has the balls to talk about it even if no one at the home office would like him to. He talks about a world where "professionals are aligned in their goals to work together". There are a lot of pros who had the goal of changing the venue away from the Arts hotel.

Regardless, more DNegs on 2p2 is better for 2p2.

Hey DNegs, welcome back. Please ignore the trolls, these forums are better for having you in them. I do want to ask you about Edog (as I'm sure many others do) but I think a new thread by yourself or opening post here on the matter or whatever down the line would be best. You've only been back a day. I guess the reason I find it so interesting is that, in general, I pretty much agree with 100% of your views ... except your stance on Erik. I'm sure your usual sound logic is there somewhere (?) but from what you've said in the past, it isn't really evident.

so when can we ban rdcrsn from pokerstars for being the biggest nit, also, team pro nit mori...?

Welcome back Daniel!

hey look at me! i am an attention whore!

Despite it being completely off-topic, he answered it when it was asked for a second time.

Limon puts it pretty well. There's a lot more interesting ways to spend money than playing poker, you don't want to give a rec player any more reason not to come to the casino. Treat the fish well and let them get away with murder.

Hey Daniel, share any knowledge on pokerstars coming to the states? I am sure it will bring the "new generation" to what it was before in the pre 2011 era in the states. Full of TV personalities with Pokerstars running ! Definitely a big impact if it happens.

I hope so! I also believe so. I think eventually intelligent heads will prevail and they will understand that without critical mass, no one makes money. Seems like this is phase one towards that outcome eventually, so there is some promise there.

I have touched on the issue several times over the year, but in a nutshell, while I don't condone gambling and not paying debts, or borrowing or not paying, I've also been a part of the gambling world for over 20 years now and I've dealt first hand over the years with people who have made mistakes. Really big mistakes. Gambling can be a real addiction, much like alcohol or drugs. The decisions people make when "under the influence" aren't always indicative of the character of the person. Sometimes good people do really bad things.

As I said, I've both dealt with, and been on the side of the fence when I owed money I didn't have, so that tends to make me compassionate towards people who ruin their lives with debt. Mind you, I obviously feel compassion for the victims, as I've been a victim many times over. Having said that, I don't play victim to it. When I chose to loan someone money and they didn't pay, that's something I need to take responsibility for. When I trusted someone enough to risk gambling with them on credit and they didn't pay, I need to take responsibility for that decision as well. Does that mean I have to like getting screwed over? No. Does that mean the person who didn't pay me is justified in what they did because it was my responsibility to decide if I trust them or not? No.

I don't see any value in being a victim to it. Instead, I choose to learn from those situations and hopefully make better financial decisions in the future.

I'm not sure if that answers your question or not, but it's the honest truth about how I feel about the issue of welching.