If you don't like 'em, don't watch em?

They are good PR and most poker careers are built on dreams (to be broken)...and one of those dreams for many is to sit at those tables and pulling down a huge score rather than grinding it out over 50 years in glorified factory buildings.

You nailed it. All the Germans who play all have pieces of each other and soft play and honestly these events are stupid.

If you guys are gonna start throwing stones, at least take the time and effort to post a hand you think is soft play.

What sports betting scandal?

This one

http://www.espn.co.uk/chalk/story/_/...-away-free-man

https://www.casino.org/news/poker-pl...-gambling-ring


edit: i am late

What percentage of themselves would you say most players have of themselves? Daniel mentioned in his vlog he had 40 percent... thats 400k. Also could anyone explain the german backing? So one backer backs all the german players? So they basically profit if only the germans do well here? That does not seem correct at all. If thats the case, who is buying pieces of those american players then?


Also is the reason why these guys don't play online mtt anymore is because there isn't that much money online in mtt in terms of high stakes? watched a recent koon video where he said lot of the players who play high rollers don't play online anymore.


Also just curious but if those high roller guys played the medium/high stakes schedule on stars/partypoker etc... would they crush the top online regs at the high/medium stakes online? Say they play the 109s, 215s and 550 dollar buyin tournaments and play a set schedule. But let say its a big prop bet to make it worthwhile for them as these tournaments are probably not even worth it for them.



The other thing im curious about is this. Let say this field had 24 of the high roller players who played in this tournament. Now let say you put 24 of the top online mtt regs at the high stakes/medium stakes on stars/partypoker that can't play in an event like this. Let say they still have to put in a good portion of the buyin to put pressure on them. What would be the odds of those regular high rollers winning it vs an online reg? Now let say you put just 3 of the top online players at the high stakes/medium stakes at mtt on stars/partypoker in this field and make it 27 players instead of 24. Would these players literally get crushed? It seems to be like high stakes mtt players and the high roller players are like a complete different category? Like how much better are these players really vs the top online regs on stars/partypoker? Do those high roller players even play online anymore?

too many questions

OP is unnecessary in the forum

The WSOP Europe invitational was better. Don’t invite poker pros, then it’s more interesting.

I love them. They attract the best in the world and I learn from just watching them.

As for why Bonomo, Petrangelo, Schindler, Peters + the Germans would play them?

They are short fields and if you get a Katz, Siegal, Einhorn, Shak etc at your table it's massively +EV. There are some super seasoned pros like Ivey and Negreanu that might be -EV in these fields, once you add in some billionaires they are a license to print money.

What's all this nonsense lately where everyone is angry about people not playing for 100% of themselves? Did Scotty Nguyen ruin the main event in 1998 because Matusow had 50%?

Anyone caught swapping or staking another player in the same event should be banned for life !!

What sort of a piece of themself do these guys have ~5%?

10 to 100%, depending on the player.

Foolish and naive thought

Why?

3 or 4 years ago there was another group of germans who grinded these highrollers back in the day. they were supposedly staked by a famous casino owner. another person who stakes some guys(not only germans) in big buy in events is/was a german aswell, but most of you prolly never heard of him.

a year ago a few germans showed up on the scene which i never heard of and started grinding these super highrollers out of the nowhere.

like negreanu said, the pros you see in these kind of tournaments are very hard working players and sure are the best at what they do, thats why these investors put up huge amounts of money to benefit from them. i still think, most of them only play for their ego. percentegewise i can not tell you how much the germans or other staked players have, but daniel, who i assume swims in money (pokerstars wink wink) only put up 400K should give you a rough idea.

How do taxes work when these hi roller players are doing all these swaps and selling action?

If all the pros are swapping action with each other, then are the Whales getting their already negative ROI further discounted by the reduced variance experienced by the pros?

Why would a rich business person put up a large buy-in in these circumstances? I know they can sell pieces of themselves as well, but they don’t know enough of the other players to cross-book.

In a thread full of stupid statements, that one might be #1.

The by far most desirable situation for most professional tournament players is to be able to maximize the markup they can charge in order to freeroll the tournament with as much of their own action left as possible. Actively trying to risk your own money is for degenerate gamblers or people that are rich enough (compared to the BI) that they don't have to care. Everybody else is about maximizing expected value while minimizing risk. If I think my expectation for a tournament is 2x my buy-in, I am very happy to give up 50% of my action for 2x to cover 100% of the buy-in.

Because they like the challenge and have the money. Or they are rich degens.

If you are David Einhorn, playing a $1mil buy-in tournament is the equivalent of somebody with a net worth of $80k (the US median) playing a $600 tournament. That's so little that you don't really have to care about all those other factors.

I agree with you that playing with a high markup and freerolling tourneys is desirable for pros, everybody knows that. What I was saying I that since I know that all of these pros are staked so heavily and have less 10% the effect of winning all of these big money prizepools is cheapened becuase I know they are not taking home all the money. Honestly, I wouldn't be mad if the players had ~50% of themselves like Dnegs, but most do not.

You added an extra zero. It's actually equivalent of somebody with a net worth of $80k playing a $60 tournament.

Which is still not that attractive an offer to play for multiple full days, on television, against players with unknown relationships and alliances, for the chance to win the equivalent of $600.

He's obviously not doing for any of those reasons. All for charity IMO

Einhorn and a couple other serious players are in, of course. But it’s not that attractive a setup to many others who could conceivably take part.