Great stuff, funniest part I thought was how some people think they get a book from Barry if he knocks them out. Actually, that would probably help + EV so much. You get people trying to get it in against bad against Barry for an autographed book.

I loved the analysis that Barry made...
That under the new WSOP ME format...
Jamie Gold and, especially, Jerry Yang...
Would likely NOT have won...
Because the pros would have had 3 months to study their games.

I want be your friend for life, Barry.

Just listened to the podcast tonight.....

First, two hours or more is fine when listening to someone like Barry. He's knowledgeable and interesting. Kudos to the guys for not interrupting Barry when he had long explanations. It's better to hear the details than short "sound-bite" interviews.

Second, how can you not know when Barry was joking? It was pretty obvious.

Third, Barry isn't arrogant. He's confident and understands his skills. Big difference.

Loved the show. Look forward to hooking up with Barry and Phil in the 10/20 Bellagio game.

I loled pretty hard when Mike suggested that the other option instead of calling the book Ace on the River, was Yellow Fever.

I am now considering renaming my directory to "lol documents".

Mike, Adam, Bunner et al.,

WTF is that sound at the beginning and the end of the pokercast this week?

Which do you think is more likely: that I have changed or that you didn't know me?

If I've changed, it's mainly that I've gotten older. In the Tunica telecast that first established my persona, I strategically refused to talk because Randy Jensen was begging me to converse with him. Steve Lipscomb, the producer, who already knew me because I am a good friend of Lyle Berman's, came up to me twice during tape breaks and asked why I wasn't playing to the camera or at least being normally conversant. I told Steve that I refuse to make Randy comfortable. I thought Randy was going to dump his chips to me out of frustration, and he did. (I made a tired mistake against him before that, and he probably outplayed me. Fortunately, I outheld him.)

Barry

If you read Barry's book there is no way you will say he is arrogant. He seems like a very down to earth guy, especially for a celeb.

How many other well known pros post in forums or give a rats ass what us (little) people think.

You're the man Barry.

my post touched barry's post...i'm never gonna wash it again!

Your post and mine made a Barry sandwhich.

you took something fun to a very dark place. you should be ashamed of yourself. LOL

Good edit. I heard someone once called him Berry and BG trashed the guy's hotel room!

I think Barry is generally arrogant when he talks about his poker skills (although he obviously was joking about Ivey and Antonius, how can anyone think otherwise?) However, he's not overbearingly arrogant, and it doesn't detract anything from him. I think it was a very interesting 2 hour show.

Listen to the end of the pokercast for a similar sound. Bunner likes to embed secret messages, send him lots of PMs badgering him why he does this. He likes it when is PM inbox is overflowing!

Barry -

You have been playing a lot of 400/800 mix lately in California (I assume you have been doing this for a long time but since I am not a Cali local I don't want to assume anything), what is the difference in the game texture between the big game and the 400/800 games in Cali? What is the commonly found mix in this rotation? What games in the mix do you feel you have the greatest edge on, and which games do you feel allow the lesser experienced players to "equalize"? When you play Chinese Poker in the mix what is the royalty structure? Do you usually play straight Chinese or do you sometimes mix it up with things like 2-7 in the middle? How does the resurgence of lowball games such as 2-7 Triple Draw and Badugi affect the texture of the game, does it bring out the gamble in your opponents in the other rounds?

thanks for answering my questions in advance!

Many of these questions have long answers and would generate follow up questions. Too much for me right now. Maybe I will address them in an audio blog or on my next pokercast appearance.

Barry

Thanks Barry, please let us know if/when you respond. Thanks!

Barry, if you had to describe every hand that could ever be played in any situation, and how you would play those hands, what would you say?

Wow BG & 2+2 thanks for a great podcast.

I am so impressed by the tight nit poker community and the replies by the Bear himself!

Barry would be a great politician. I have to say that no matter the topic, he is convincing. I think specifically of the 4 month delay in the final table. It certainly makes sense and Negraneau echoed the same comments on his blog. I was generally indifferent about the delay, but am now in favor of it.

There were other topics in the podcast where his point of view and explanations were convincing!

I concur that poker road is not in competition with two plus two. I listen to both and any other poker podcast and the better the guests on each show, the happier the listener! Any possibility to learn helps the game and grows it.

The clarification regarding playing against Sebok made a whole lot of sense. It just shows what integrity he has. The absolute scandal, stories about users selling their accounts and various collusion I have encountered online just hurt the game (witnessed a cash game last night where the two individuals who doubled their buy-in never played a showdown against each other while I was there). To force friends/family to always show cards is as transparent as possible.

The only curiosity I had was about what type of changes/improvements has he recommended to the software? I may be too new to online play and too ignorant to think about it, but nothing comes to mind on flaws/problems with what I see.

Sorry for the long post, guess I am making up for the months I have read without posting.

First i just wanna say i love the show! Awesome pokercast with barry! been listening for a few months and went back and listened to all the old episodes also including those from the old show! Great stuff!

In the pokercast with barry you guys talked alot about the new WSOP main event final table delay and brought up the idea of someone dieing during the months b4 the actual final table is played..

Its very inlikely but for me it could be reality! Ive been playing the steps sattelites on stars trying to win a seat to the main event but it mite be a mute point now.. I am a specialist in the Army national guard and without going into the specifics am scheduled to deploy in the early fall..

I know its very unlikely that i would make the final table but its kinda discouraging knowing that i wouldnt be able to play...

I understand all the benifits of the delay and actual think its gonna be pretty cool just kinda a bummer for me and a select few..

Keep up the great work and ill for sure keep listening!! Good luck at the tables all..!

-dawheelz

+ 10 figures

WSOP Main changes:

After I listened to Barry's reasoning I began to change my mind (thinking as a poker player) and I recently heard an interview with DN (Poker Road) and he was suggesting a deep stack shootout type ME and talking also about how it would even the field and make it better for the pros, etc.

My main question now is this - Isn't better for us if the general public who plays on occasion and wants to get lucky still believes that they have a chance to win? The current change only affects final table play so I don't see that as a big issue as there still would be a lot of people who get lucky and cash. Plus there would still be the luck factor at the final table regardless of how much you study the other players.

Whereas, DN's idea would reduce the luck factor and I believe the long term affect of that would discourage the fishies from entering and would hurt the ME and poker overall. Poker boomed when Moneymaker won and his story was told of how he satelited in for only a few bucks online. It wasn't because people know that it's a game of skill and only pro's should win.

I do like the idea of a deepstacked shootout with a long blind structure for a non-ME event though.

On a sidenote: It's great that Barry comes in here and posts replies. It just shows how down to earth he is and great guy overall. Also, for some reason I thought his book was more about stories than it was strategy (the name I think threw me off). I read a little bit of the book in a book store and will now be buying a copy.

If your reading this Barry I'll see you tomorrow at the PPA event in Kent.

how do I d/l the podcast to my Itunes? Also I'm in Vegas for the first time right now. Any suggestions on which low buy-in tournaments to play? I don't want to get into the crap shoot 15 minute blind level tourneys. So anyone have any ideas??

Come on Barry "shy away"? Neither of us are 17 year olds I had an opinion of your broadcast and I stated it. I suspect from your defensiveness that I am correct in my assessment, You are correct and it is obvious that I do not know you just as you do not know me. My assessment of your interview was taken from the words you spoke, the inflection you gave them, an understanding of the language and of course no historical knowledge of the personal relationships involved.

I do not know if your intent was to imply you do not respect me - we do not know each other so other than the civility and respect I give any other human being - I extend to all unless I ascertain they do not deserve it. What I know of you is that you are an established poker player and from what I know of that I have some respect. What I spoke about is how I read what you said and that gives measure to how or if I respect you as a man.

How someone who clearly has status in the poker community would make an observation of diminution of that status from my comment is at best.... weird. Not withstanding your (I would say inaccurate) interpretation of my Guliani analogy - which was meant to demonstrate someone who has accomplished something typically does not find it necessary to say it over and over and over again then add negative remarks of others to further increase his importance by comparison E.G. real heroes are not short of others saying who will say it and usually shrink from saying it themselves. I did not mean that having told a lie that status was lost. Having accomplished something, and the truth of that accomplishment not being the subject of the conversation, does not diminish the accomplishment itself. Having said that, being an adult, I accept your criticism of my criticism of what I consider fair observations of you - having seen you speak places other than on this broadcast. I understand that I am is missing what you have now given as background. Certainly friends speak from a history and language often misunderstood by those who have not shared that experience. I hope you are not saying that you are unable to speak of friends and past experiences in a manner that conveys the history, friendship and uniqueness without also conveying what I spoke about. I am 45 and while I certainly do not know everything, I have heard many stories, poker and otherwise and can reliably ascertain the tone and content after listening.

I will say this, you know nothing of me, at least less than I of you even after this dialog. Being of the "old guard" does not give you the permission to make derisive comments of others - you are not the only "old guard" poker player with stories to tell or who has an important, unique perspective of poker. I accept that you may not agree with me but you seem to be missing a point every good story teller knows - how you tell the story is as important, some would say more important than the story itself. Your argument goes to your disagreement with my thoughts of your interview - needless to say I am at least as entitled to my opinion of how you conducted your side of the interview as you are entitled to say it as you like. Part of posting s to make a point, find out information, say something get feedback and so on. Not knowing you, having had that opinion after listening to you elsewhere, perhaps I wondered about the characteristics I finally wrote about. If you feel it's alright to come across this way that's your decision to make. I've listened and read a lot of "old guard" poker players of comparable status and to be sure there is a lot of personality in this dialog - not much bragging, putting others down.

I want to be clear here because in one passage you completely changed the intent and meaning of what I wrote - I did not call you a liar, I was not talking about your "credibility" as to the truthfulness or your stories, it would be silly to argue that I know you better than your friends I do not, I am not nitpicking at a word or two you said, I have no way (as really no one does) to determine you intent or "seriousness" therefore I am not able to make the determination of whether you are serious or not and that is simply not logically a part of my objectivity. You will not find your argument within my statements. My comment had to do with what I said in the first post - that a lot of your comments seemed to be trying to take credit for every little thing and I thought it unnecessary and beneath someone of your stature - this is not mysterious or invented. I replayed the interview with several people who all (some greater some lesser) had a similar feeling. If you will not or cannot take a fair, simple criticism without characterizing it as something I did not say and did not mean then you are correct "we are not not the same wavelength". I can accept, though I do not agree with you characterization, of my post. I however can see that there may be something there for disagreement - that you cannot tells me something about you.

I'll close by saying that "In the poker world", as you say, there are many storytellers - just like any other "world". Each good storyteller decides not the facts of the story but how the story is told or written - particularly when they themselves say or write it. A story worthy of being told and a storyteller worthy of telling it are simply not above criticism. As a marketing professional I know the good ones make good decisions about what to do with observations by those who consume their product.

In the "poker story" business the range goes from Doyle Brunson to Phil Hellmuth and many, many others. Each person chooses how they tell their story and how they told it remembered.

Jon(Merlin333)


OK Barry, I'll close by saying, I'm a writer and a reread of this answer can clearly be taken as somewhat harsh - I really don't mean to be and surely don't want to start a "fight". I hope we can just agree to disagree. Without doubt you're one of the greatest poker players and what you do with your winnings is exemplary. I listened to the pokercast because I wanted to hear what you had to say. After I listened I had an opinion and wrote it - you can consider what I wrote or not but my intent was not to be nasty.

Much continued success

Hey i was just lissening to the episode with Barry in it. He was saying that he is worth 10 figurers, is that really true? how can someone be worth 1bil from just playing poker or did he do very well in stocks etc.?
P.S. The episode with Barry was very good and hope to see him back again.

n/m