I understand the difference. What I'm saying is that Negreanu is not starting from scratch and I think it's a mistake to underestimate how quickly he could meaningfully improve his online game.

you might as well be saying that someone who won playing Bingo against a bunch of senior citizens would have a chance at beating a Grandmaster at chess. it's just not even remotely in the same realm.

I don't think he'd win the bet mate but that analogy is ludicrous.

you would be surprised at how small of an overstatement that really is.

Another ludicrous response.

No it isn't

You obviously know **** all about chess. Grandmaster level chess is only ever attained by few players, most who started before the age of 10, the majority started at about 8. It requires years of utter dedication to studying the game getting coaching and keeping up with the mounds of theory.



Obviously equating live MTTs to high stakes online cash is ridiculous, the games are two different worlds and I seriously doubt that anyone can just up and beat these games with two weeks practice. But there is no doubt that equating bingo to grandmaster level chess is a hyperbole to the extreme.

If a chess analogy needs to be made, it would be like saying a lifetime candidate master could take 2 weeks to become a grandmaster. The rules of the games are the same, as they are with MTTs vs. cash games, but the theories behind each can be different.

Still, people are grasping pretty hard if they think that MTTs and cash games are *that* different.

Yeah that analogy I can accept as a better example.

It's not that MTTs are hugely different to cash games. It's the fact that the standard of play in live MTTs, even high stakes ones, is laughably bad compared to high stakes online cash.

Yeah, and I'll totally agree with that. My post was more pointed towards the people who make it sound like one of the top MTT players in the world can't beat any stakes of online cash. I'm also not really supporting Daniel here, just making a general comment.

The thing is poker is not like chess. In chess, it's only win/loss/draw. As a result a GM can have an almost 100% expectation vs. a Candidate Master (an above-average amateur), while both have 100% expectation vs. a beginner.

That's not true at all in poker. Negreanu might be -EV in pots played vs. "Online Harry" but still have a big edge over him in a tournament because he picks up more EV from the weak players. That's why it's so silly to say Negreanu's results don't mean anything because he achieved them in weak fields - a large part of his skill edge comes from maximizing his expectation against the weaker players in the field and there's nothing wrong with that. That's what the top poker players do - process available information to make poker decisions to maximize their EV.

And the ability to do this is directly transferrable between live and online play. The only difference is the type of information available (live reads vs. HUD data).

did he lose yet?

Yeah, mate in 9. Or something.

the online players obviously play better than recreational beginners than negreanu does, so not sure what your point is.

it's not like the skill of beating beginners occupies some separate magical part of the brain that's only granted to televised luckboxes of the early 2000s. online players play much better vs strong players, and also much better vs weak players.

It does take different skill levels to beat live and online. Most is similar though. Online players lack value for live reads. Live players lack precision in ranges, sizes, timing etc. Since Daniel is already the ultimate master in one of the games, it is tempting to assume he can be a master in similar games as well.

Now a couple of troll comments...
Obviously Daniel was playing NL 200 to make some money. I also feel that I should warn you guys, that Daniel on the river might be able to make you fold hands that might not should be in your range. And playing with a VPIP of only 10% UTG when people are tricker happy with KJ. I mean, obviously DN should widen his range and go for thin value and jam getting it in with a nut hand like KQ as UTG.

I suggest DN that for his next session. He will play 5/10 NL HE 6m during peak. He should then get a little idea of what "R" means. But he wont fully understand "R" until he puts in some more volume and the regulars will be table selecting him off.

Btw. I like the way Daniel played that hand. If he has a nutter hand, the opponent most likely have a high pair. A high pair might control that river. While only insane or balanced players will bluff barrel that river. But then again, a balanced player will tend to make this bluff mainly when he has the "A-Blocker". So if DN has A-high flush, then the other guy no longer has that blocker bluff option. DN wants value against a high pair that might have a heart, that other wise probably would have pot controlled the flushy river.

Have you ever had a poker session where you didn't win, lose or draw?

You mean PLO?

Grandmaster chess is only attained by a few players in the same way as being competitive at 5kNL is only attained by a few players. Negreanu is at bingo level right now. He couldn't even play well in the One Drop and that's supposed to be his discipline.

how surprising..DN chickened out....NEEEEEERDS!

He was probably just really REALLY stoned man

gliff from the last month? Did DN reply something?

So I take it he bailed out because surely he was taken up on this offer......

If you really think that going from playing bingo to competing at grandmaster level chess is no different to going from being a top live MTT pro to competing at 5Knl 6max then I really don't think I'm going to bother trying to argue with you.