It’s been quite a while since I have posted on here, but it’s time to let bygones be bygones and move forward. I’m not sure that I will be a regular poster on here, I never really have been, but if there is something I feel the need to chime in on, I’ll do so.

There has been a lot of talk recently about the state of poker, sparked by Joe Hachem’s comments, and I think it’s great to have a healthy discussion on where we are at and what we can do collectively to help promote the game we all love. If you haven’t read Phil Galfond’s blog yet, please do, it’s extremely well written and right on point. He does a great job of illustrating the strengths and weaknesses of the old school and the new school.

It all got me to thinking about what is my vision for a poker world that works? Not to say that it doesn’t right now, but what is my vision for a poker world that works. It goes something like this:

My vision for a poker world that works is one where the professionals are aligned in their goals to work together to make sure we aren’t just taking, but also giving back for the greater good. A world where amateurs look forward to sitting at a table with the pros to both satisfy their competitive spirit as well as be entertained. A world that they feel comfortable and encouraged to join without fear of humiliation or embarrassment. A world where the game is fun first and a competitive endeavor second. A world where players think about whats best for everyone first, understanding that in the end they will benefit from that as well.

Sounds like a good Choice of goals.

Hippie.

Whats up daniel!?

Sounds paradoxical to me.

it doesn't have to be. the hardest part is getting everyone to agree on what the greater good means. that's where communities like this are important.

Exactly. Visualize whirled peas.

If Daniel isn't banned then he surely isn't the type to shy away from using his real name original account to speak.

I believe there is a win-win once you understand the motivation behind why certain people play. Pros play to make money, pay their bills and build a bankroll so they can create a good quality of life. I think amateurs play because they want to have fun, get better, and maybe have dreams of getting lucky and winning big money.

I believe that once you identify the motives you can start to look closely at things that are in line with both groups motivation, as well as things that wouldn't be. For example:

Berating an amateur for making a bad play. That's not in line with anyone's vision. The amateur isn't going to enjoy that, which makes him less likely to return which means that hurts the pros vision, which is to make more money.

Conversely, an amateur sits down that no one has seen before. The pros at the table say hello, ask him what his name is, where he is from, what he does for a living, and make him feel included in the table banter. This creates a friendly environment where the new player feels comfortable, is more likely to have fun, which in turn means the pros will likely profit from that while this new player is in the learning curve phase of his poker playing.

Plenty of examples like this, but if we think about each one in terms of what works for everyone, that's an excellent starting point IMO.

I'm in the amateur category.

But if I were a pro, wouldn't it be in my best interest to maximize my EV at each poker game I play in. Attack the amateurs, seat select relative to the amateurs, and so on. Let other pros sacrifice EV for the greater good. Not worry about the future but concentrate on the present because as a pro I wouldn't think of it as a long term gig.

Here lies the problem. If everyone thought that will destroy the game. We used to call these types of players "nits" or "parasites" that only look out for their best interest. Of course what they are doing isn't illegal, but I also don't believe it's in their best interest long term, or even short term.

It's him/ check his twitter.

Tweets All / No replies
Daniel Negreanu ‏@RealKidPoker 12m
@Kevmath can you tell this Boba Felt dude not to ban my account lol
View conversation

I Think that it is a good idea but not very feasible because in poker a majority of people are looking out for only themselves and many people do not understand that making the game more entertaining for recreational players or amateur players is better for the longevity of poker growth. I believe many think short term more than long term

Plus. You are both Canadians.

Fun fact: I was the person who first got DN to post on here way back in 2004 after I sent him a hand history to analyze.

link to philly g's blog?

Perhaps you could answer this for me.

First off let me preface this by saying I do think you hold good value as a site rep and you do a good job at Live events promoting Stars. Personally I think you're a phony as a person but that's irrelevant as you do bring more players to the game... and that's what you're paid to do.

Can you not see how when sitting at the top (via sponsorship) it's probably not your place to be saying that pros shouldn't be looking out for their immediate best interest when as you're seen over your career... pro's go busto left and right and many can't survive the lifestyle that often comes with it.

Now for yourself keeping the rec player happy and depositing is great as your sponsorship won't be in jeopardy and you might even get a raise. Because of this sponsorship you're sort of removed from a lot of the pitfalls that a lot of other pro's have and perhaps it's not you're place to tell pro's who don't have sustainability via a 3rd party on what's right for them.

Your thoughts on this different perspective?

I hear ya, but that's not the way it's always been. In the past, people really did understand the importance of working together, but since the internet boom the social aspect and understanding of this concept got a bit lost in the shuffle.

When I came up, guys like Lenny, Mickey, etc would start a 3-4 handed game of just pros, knowing that it's not worth their time financially in the moment, but they all knew that they had to "open the store" if you will. That way when tourists came to town they could sit right down. It was the nits, rarely ever the best players, who would then scurry to take the remaining seats. They were looked down upon and not well liked. That pressure they felt had to make them uncomfortable. Few people are comfortable with not being liked, but what could they expect? The pros starting the game do all the work and they just reap the benefits? Of course they would be looked down upon, and that pressure meant the number of nits was minimal. Sadly, nit mentality is rampant since the advent of online poker and the same social stigma associated with that isn't quite as present.

Imagine having a desk job, doing all the work, but your boss takes credit for all of it and reaps all the financial benefits. You may not like your boss very much!

The problems with poker lie deeper than the players doing what they can to profit. The problems with poker you will find in any industry. Capitalism is a game where someone has to lose if you want to win...

http://www.michaelelliott.net/workin...greatest-good/

I agree we should focus on creating a healthier environment at the poker table.

The other day in a charity cash game there were two drunk stock traders on my left. We talked a lot, joked around and had a good time. One guy bought me an energy drink and later in the night I bough us some appetizers and brought water when they obv had enough alcohol.

I feel like the typical grinder pro sees these player types and quietly waits for them to make a big mistake and take advantage of them while they are drunk. Taking a most selfish line.

We more experienced players should be extending our hands out more often by communicating in a more human manor. The community focused line.

These actions will generally make the poker table a safer more comfortable place that amateurs are more willing to go to. It also brings more respect and honor to the game.

I've definitely taken the selfish line before, but was happy recently that I was able to open up more and take an active role in making the game better.

http://www.runitonce.com/chatter/spe...he-new-school/

Thanks for the feedback. It's important to note that I wasn't always a successful sponsored pro and I came up through the ranks just like everyone else. With little money in my pocket, going broke regularly until I figured things out. I have seen what poker looked like then, and what it looks likes now. I think I'm qualified enough to speak to what I think works and what doesn't work. I truly don't believe the every man for himself approach is what works best, especially for those guys that are struggling to stay afloat. They are the ones most hurt by amateurs not playing the game, not me.

Ultimately this is just my personal opinion and my personal vision. I'm aware that not everyone will agree with it... and that's ok.

Hi Daniel,

Where do you see women in your vision for the poker world? When this whole "poker is dying" debate came up, I wondered why the community has not made more efforts to attract more female recreational players to the game, as it seems like a huge untapped market.

You have many years of experience playing with both amateurs and professionals; I'm curious if you have any ideas for strategies that would help introduce more women to the game. I'm also wondering if you have any personal insights on things that can make for a more friendly environment for women at the tables.

first of all, i don't see pokerstars as a "3rd party." their income is directly related to a healthy poker economy. you may not respect his game or the patch on his arm, but daniel tends to do what's in the best interest of poker. i have no reason to doubt his sincerity here.

if you don't have a 3rd party to fall back on, you should take his ideas even more seriously. while you're trying to win money, the waters are drying up.


relevance? seriously, you just sound like sour grapes.

Who are Lenny and Mickey?

Ok so just prior to signing with Stars when you were financially not in the best of spots was your primary concern in life "how's the health of poker?"

The point is it's easy to sit at the top and dictate but in the trenches it's not so easy. When you come out like trying to save to poker yet won't ever say anything that could hurt your own bottom line it's pretty tough for people to buy into what your pitching.

I mean if you could link me to a thread/tweet where you speak badly of your employer in any capacity in the interest of poker... or if you can show me that you bash others equally for being scumbags and don't protect your friends perhaps I'll change my mind. Could you offer some examples?