DNeg keeps doing what he knows to do : playing small ball(s)

This. I would love Daniel to do some sort of 50k hand challenge at 100NL for the million wager instead of this 5k one in which needless to say he would get crushed.

A lot of people would be very surprised when Negs not only fails to beat 100NL over that sample but is a significant loser. What sort of odds could I get against DN for this type of bet if it were to happen?

Find all posts by DNegs
General Information
Last Activity: Today 01:14 PM

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/members/391743/

I'm pretty sure he can beat 100NL.

lol

By what reasoning? 'BUT HE HAZ BEATEN LIVE DONKAMENTS FOR 20 YEARZ LOLZ!' isn't really a valid reason. Like someone else said he is going to be up against a lot of regs who used to crush midstakes but had to move down for volume reasons, and any fish that are there are favourite to be eaten by a reg way before Negreanu gets them. These regs know what they're doing. There's much less of a direct proportional relationship between skill and stakes these days. In today's games if you can beat 100NL you know what you're doing. DN isn't tapped into that mindset.

Cue lots of people saying it's loleasy to beat 100NL and yet we still see no graphs.

DN would do really well at 100nl imo because tons of rando fish can afford to pony up 100 bucks to play with him. I honestly think without rakeback (or with standard rb for avg stars 100nl reg) and on an acct ppl don't know is DN, the bet would be close, and whether or not he received coaching would determine how i bet.

for 5knl i'd lay odds but i'm not rich enough to bet with daniel so maybe he does know something I dont

He gets dealt 4 cards instead of two, and is allowed to use them all.

Gotta give him a fighting chance. It's only fair.

some of you guys watch him play when playing with pokerstars money and trying to create an entertaining tv show on "the big game" and assume that he is just terrible when in reality he was just trying to entertain

im not saying he would jump in and beat high stakes online games, but if you dont think that he could beat 100nl IF HE WAS REALLY TRYING HIS HARDEST then you are completely delusional

Sorry, but no. 100NL online is no walk in the park these days. It's softer than mid stakes online, obviously, but also has higher rake. So it ends up being not much softer. Online poker is soooooo much tougher than live poker currently because if it wasn't, there'd a be a free lunch economically speaking; players can put in a ****load more volume online and thus only need microscopic winrates for it to be worth it. Daniel simply doesn't put in volume online at any stake. I think people would be shocked to see just how poorly he'd fare at 100NL if he did put in a lot of hands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DvZikcsjds

this was a commentary Negreanu made about his play at 200nl, presumably before Black Friday. it's a 12 part series. what do people think of his thought processes and plays he makes? in the first hand, calling an UTG raise with J7s from the blinds is pretty atrocious. just from that play alone, i can deduce he would be a huge loser at even as low as 25nl, let alone 5knl.

he does run extremely hot here as well.

Your posts are just consistently incredible, I will literally pay you to write a book on poker , it would be ****ing joke

Would these same pros who think it's easy to beat mid stakes online feel the same if they and two mates were told to build a house from scratch and qualified builders stated " Oh it's easy to build a house, anyone who can't is an idiot.' It's only easy if you know how to do it, and whatever the debate, we know that 99 per cent of poker players can't beat mid stakes plus.

haha ur a ****ing idiot

99% confirmed dolts

analogy sucks by the way- You're comparing these pros who haven't yet learnt how to build a house to people who have actually learnt to play poker. Makes no sense.

And for that reason alone, i'm out.

can he game select? or does he just have to sit at a table full of regs?

when game selecting i make money at 100nl, if i was dumb enough to sit at any table and not leave no matter the lineup and put in 50k hands i would lose money


again if he was gonna sit in on a game and play like he did on the big game, or when he is playing around because he has to much money and 100nl means nothing to him then he wont win

if he makes a significant enough side bet to actually make him want to win then he will win, if he sits in tough reg filled games and LOLimps utg with J7s then obv he will get crushed, but if he is playing for a serious amount of HIS bankroll then he wouldnt play like that

analogy isn't the best, the point is still correct.

I agree that 1-tabling with intense game selection would drastically increase his chances, but let's face it, that's not really what it means to beat 100NL. Any solid TAG player can game select his way to victory at almost any stakes if he's patient enough.

In the end, we have to ask, "what does it really mean to beat 100NL?" I think most people, when they say that, are talking about being able to sit every day at multiple tables at that stake and still come out ahead after rake. By that definition, DN would almost certainly be a loser at 100NL.

I can't wait for poker stars to come back to the states, so I can get in on the 100nl games since they are all soft.

Sorry to interrupt your tirade and spoil the lols but I don't recall seeing people saying he'd never beat 100nl. The thread was about whether he could jump in and win within 2 weeks. A live player with very limited experience in 100bb poker online is unlikely to do this. In more traditional 100nl games even less likely, but in zoom he'd have a higher possible chance. Oh and if poker for a living is as bad as you describe it then you're either doing the poker part or the living part wrong imo.

Confirmed killer.

he doesnt have to 1 table


ill try putting it like this, if daniel had a 10k life bankroll and needed to start over and the only option for him to make money in the world was playing 100nl he would win in that game

thats why for him to win now at it he would have to make a big enough prop bet for him to take it seriously

the beauty of this vid is @ approx 8:00 where DN is talking smack to PH about being afraid to play Antonio. He goes on to say there's only one way to prove he's better and that's to actually play.

ftr if this ever takes place, pls reserve me 10k

Noone has bothered to qualify this statement. Most people continue to overestimate the extent of the linear relationship between skill and stakes online. I mean obviously 100NL regs will be less capable than 5kNL regs but at the same time a ton of the regs from midstakes that had to move down for volume reasons will be there and a lot of those guys will have taken shots at the higher stakes before. There is just way less of a segmented skillset per stake like there used to be. People move up or down fluidly wherever the good games are, making a lot of regs who play most of their game at 100NL equipped to deal with games elsewhere if they need to.

It's like people think "Oh well he plays so HIGH live for so much MONIEZ, in a totally different format with a totally different skillset against totally different players, look how much WORSE the standard must be all the way down at 100NL online!"

Makes no sense whatsoever.

You might as well come on here and argue that Eli Elezra or Sam Farha could beat 100NL consistently (or rather show the skillset to do so, which is more relevant considering the problems with these type of guys getting volume).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOiwt1b1t8Q

6min single raised pot he k/r gets in Q9o on 932cc for value