I think he just bite off more than he can chew.

There are people, including Negreanu, who have showed consistently high results in MTTs over many years. Sure, there are likely a few players who are just as good as him and haven't had the same results due to variance, but it's ridiculous to argue that he's not a top player. And sorry, I don't buy the argument that "the top online players don't play in tournaments because of variance." Since people seem to be implying that anyone who plays online 1/2 NL or higher has superior poker skills to Negreanu and the top live MTT players, you'd have to assume that over the years, some of them would have taken shots in MTTs, and (again, assuming they really have such a massive skill edge based on their understanding of GTO ranges and such), that one or two or ten would have hit heaters and gone to the top.

I still can't understand why you assume that of all the people with the intelligence and drive to become a top poker player, that none of them chose to focus on tournaments instead of cash? Or is your argument that they just require fundamentally different personality types - Negreanu would never have become an NBA player because he doesn't have the height, and he'll never be a top online poker player because he doesn't have the (..insert some quality..). And maybe there's some autistic online poker prodigy who can't win live MTTs because he can't understand live reads. I suppose it's possible, but I doubt it.

Lol I thought this too. He might have been able to do this in the past when inviting people to a live game, but it somehow seems just a little less appealing to be invited to sit in front of your computer alone in your house and lose thousands of dollars to faceless internet poker geeks

A lot of people are maybe smart enough right off the bat, and wont even consider taking a serious shot at tourneys. When you look at the payouts, you ll realize pretty quickly that the lions share of the prize pool is being divided by way of 20-30bb luckfest at the FT. You d have to be nuts/naive/already rich/not very smart to consider that kind of poker as your bread and butter when you start out.

Top players focus on cash games because there's so much more money to be made in them than in tournaments and with less variance.

Of course many focus primarily on tournaments but it's not because there's more money to be made from them in the long run it's because they're attracted by the big score.

Edges aren't so great in live tournaments between the top players and competent ones to the extent that they overcome variance. While skill makes a difference variance is the ultimate factor.

I'm not suggesting Daniel's not one of the top live tournament players in the world I'm just suggesting it doesn't really mean much.

No interest in getting into a debate but thought I'd quickly say I think this has happened at least a few times. Apologies if I'm wrong because I don't really keep tabs on the stories of the top MTT guys but I believe Jason Mercier and Jake Cody used to play low-midstakes online before hitting an MTT heater and becoming one of the top MTT pros. I assume there's prob others as well.

In terms of the top online players, a lot of them have great records playing the high rollers when they have decided to play. People like Ike, Daniel Colman, Daniel Cates, Doug Polk etc have done well recently from high stakes live MTTs despite them not being their main game (obviously huge variance involved in the samples they have played).

what's the equivalent of DN "beating high stakes online" in terms of number of hands?

Even with all the tournaments that DN has played, he has not come anywhere near the long-run in live large field MTTs. I would be surprised if anyone ever actually gets to the long-run in their lifetime.

Not saying anything about his skill level here, just that you can't go off his results to say that he's one of the best.

These seating scripts are truly unbelievable

I just did some testing

I can't even reserve a seat at a table without "FMyLife" snap reserving the seat next to me, its actually hilarious and terrible for the games

HERP DERP

you have no idea what you're talking about

Wasnt you're name Kid Poker and didnt you swear never to post on twoplustwo again after they gave you a 24hr ban?

Right, I totally agree with you. But the point I was making is that Negreanu (and a few other live pros) have still maintained their position at the top despite these online guys coming up. The edge that the online guys might have just isn't that significant against elite live MTT pros. (a lot of the lower level MTT guys have fallen off, but there are a few, including Negreanu, who have managed to stay at the top).

What makes you think Daniel is actually going to make any bet on himself playing 25/50 or higher online?

Has he ever done it before? No.
Has he ever won at online cash games? No.
Does he even play online cash games? No.
Does he even play live cash games? No.
Is he known to be a cash game fish? Yes.

Has he ever even beaten a really large field to win a bracelet? No.
(Bracelet fields were 229, 135, 287, 479, 405, 80)

He plays around 50 tournaments a year. Is it really that hard to win once in a while? Especially when you don't care at all about losing the tournament buy in because someone else is paying it for you?

This thread is 76 pages of useless banter

How do you become a known cash game fish if you don't play cash games?

Because he made a bet, and is waiting for action.

Can someone explain to me what is the fundamental difference between adapting your play based on HUD reads and adapting it based on live observations?

It's the same game - you use information to put an opponent on a range and choose an optimal line based on that range, while also trying to keep your own play balanced. There's no fundamental difference, just the way you gather information.

Gathering data based on a HUD is a technical skill that can be learned, same with analyzing hands away from the table to understand your opponent's tendencies, or using simulations to construct optimal ranges. Anyone can learn these skills, they're not the hard part of playing poker.

The hard part is executing plays based on information in real time, which is a skill which the top live and top online players have and have spent years developing.

Because he lost over $2 million on High Stakes Poker.

Played TV cash games, lost big.
Used to play live cash games at casinos in Vegas, was a loser, stopped playing.

I don't blame him for not playing cash games as he's just sticking to his poker strengths, which is freerolling the 50 tournaments Stars buys him into every year.

This "bet" would be a like a 3rd string quarterback in the NFL saying "I can win the superbowl" and then having the starter and backup get hurt, getting put in to play, failing miserably, then saying "I didn't mean I could win the superbowl, I just meant I believe, if I took two weeks of practice to become a good player, I could one day win the superbowl."

DNeg , stand up And do something about seating scripts.

Action


Daniel pussying out


"Not going to happen anytime soon"
"I'd game select pretty hard"
"(I'll give action) once poker legislation happens in US..." (could be never)
"I didn't issue a challenge"

Says he hates seat scripting but would "game select hard" if he was playing. Isn't that pretty much the same thing?


Sore loser at 4:00

I believe he made his poker start grinding Limit Holdem live. As far as High Stakes Tv show that's a pretty small sample to judge anyone's ability. I think many of us watched those games thinking they were soft. Half of DNegs losses were running into quads twice. VS Gus it was hidden, vs Eric it did look like a terrible call. Remember Phil Galfond and Robl were both losers in the game too.

I think by 2004 DNegs was the winningest live tournament player before any Pokerstars or other endorsements. To say he built his poker career by freerolling tournaments and luckboxing wins is ignorant.

Even if you believe that, why after dozens of other people being sponsored by sites is he 10 years later still the winningest tournament player?

You are missing the point. It's got nothing to do with live reads versus the HUD.

The point is that tournaments is full of amateurs. So to win, you only have to be better them.

For cash games, say you start at 1/2. There are hundreds of regs there, all of whom are multitabling and have played hundreds of thousands/millions of hands in games where it's usually 5 regs and one weakish player. So to beat 1/2 you have to at a minimum be equal to those 5 regs (all experienced professionals) and be able to beat the one weakish player by enough to beat rake and sustain a winrate.

So, jumping from tournament poker, where you might have 1 or 2 players at your 9person table able to beat 1/2 online (except perhaps the last few tables near the end where it might be 4/5 people) is a massive leap for most live tournament players.

That's comparing 1/2 to Live MTT poker. To get from 1/2 to 2/4 you have to be in the top 10% of those hundreds of regs and be able to beat most winning regs at that stakes. Then to get from 2/4, to 3/6, to 5/10, to 10/20, to 25/50, at every stage you have to be better than all the regs at that level. It's like moving from high-school basketball to college basketball to NBA, at every level the standard improves, you have to be truly elite at the level below to move up to the next level.

Meanwhile, live MTT pros are still playing at a pick-up game level where most of the players aren't that good. Sure, there might be great players in that pick-up game, but you wouldn't say anyone in that game was good enough for the NBA unless you saw them destroy in high school basketball or college basketball.

Nothing to do with live reads versus a HUD. All about the standard of play and how it is necessary to play and beat the best to become the best.

very strong chance this is a level, no-one is this dumb.

The players that play HSNL online are incomparably better than live MTT players. Saying "hurr durr it's the same game fundamentally he could beat them both " is like saying anyone who can beat San Marino at football can beat Germany.

"Less than zero doubt" went out the window