Daniel Negreanu's very own containment thread. All things Danny go here
how bad must he be when a girl falls asleep while making out and snores right after?
life fish..... food arrived but didn't eat it....
o well atleast the girl grinded him on the rails of a club, almost got kicked out for grinding? Kappa
yeah i mean scott seiver and Ausmus are crushing and might end up down for the series
Ausmus is currently #4 in the money list for this series with 3.45m in cashes, I'm pretty sure you could max out every single event, not counting the flipament I guess which has no limit, and he wouldn't be down for the series. Seiver currently has 1.12m for the series, though he's guaranteed at least 60k or so for the FT he's currently playing, which is less than DN has cashed for, so it's not impossible he ends up with 3 bracelets and a losing series, I'm not sure what he played as far as the high rollers.
It's just a matter of time before Daniel wins POY while being down money perfectly illustrating what a fairy tale grinding live MTTs is.
Daniel won POY in 2004 and 2013 and I am almost certain he lost money doing it in 2004, and I would not be the least bit surprised if he lost money in 2013 too.
Daniel Negreanu is the King of rebuys/re-entries.
Daniel won POY in 2004 and 2013 and I am almost certain he lost money doing it in 2004, and I would not be the least bit surprised if he lost money in 2013 too.
Daniel Negreanu is the King of rebuys/re-entries.
Almost no way he lost money in either of those series, he cashed for around 2 million in 2013 before there were many high roller and in 2004 everything was a 5k or less besides the main event so he would have had to rebuy several hundred times.
Daniel won POY in 2004 and 2013 and I am almost certain he lost money doing it in 2004, and I would not be the least bit surprised if he lost money in 2013 too.
Daniel Negreanu is the King of rebuys/re-entries.
Without rebuys there's less than 100k in buy-ins in 04', your certainty is laughable.
Daniel fell off his horse last night in the $25K High Roller H.O.R.S.E. event.
He can re-enter it one more time today.
What a fitting way for Daniel, the King of re-buys, to end his poker world series, by re-entering a high roller event.
Does he even play on GG? Has anyone ever seen him play?
Bro, there are so many classic moments you haven’t seen. Go find them on YouTube and enjoy. At one point all of his streams ended up in a huge meltdown where he was bashing his keyboard and kicking ****. Just watch the final minute of every stream, the rest is ****.
Probably up money long term. Most people are down for the Series. That is the nature of tournaments. the money is in the top places.
He dropped $500K on 2 bullets to the $250K. Either he plays with his own money or is up long term or like most people, he sells action to the $250K. He probably sells it at close to even based on his results in tournaments like that.
Winning that 5-day $50K 9-game is huge. 89 entries, mostly top pros.
I know people don't like him because of his sponsorship deal and o
Sure but how many people who win a bracelet are down for the series let alone a bracelet for 1.2 m?
Tournaments are obviously super high variance and good players can brick a wsop.
But when you don't brick one, and you win a bracelet for a lot of money and still finish down that's a really bad sign.
People who wanna suck the guy off for winning an 89 person tournament, only looking at it in a vacuum and ignoring his last 5-10 years of results make zero sense.
In the next 10 years there's a very good chance he
1)wins 1-2 bracelets
2) is down money overall.
I agree him winning that is huge- but not because it's some amazing accomplishment. It's huge bc it makes him even more marketable.
Daniel won POY in 2004 and 2013 and I am almost certain he lost money doing it in 2004, and I would not be the least bit surprised if he lost money in 2013 too.
Daniel Negreanu is the King of rebuys/re-entries.
I'd be shocked if he lost in 2004. There were almost no huge tournaments, no rebuys, and he was way ahead of the field skill wise.
I am not going to suck him off, regardless of whether he is into that sort of thing.
Look at the winners of the PPC. That is huge. He has results. I don't think he is a superstar now if he ever was. However, he does OK overall in the high stakes tournaments he plays.
I wonder if Daniel is up in terms of total buy-ins during the WSOP. It looks to me like he cashed for a total of about 60 buy-ins (mostly from winning 23 in the PPC and 17 in the Kick-Off). He probably didn’t play 60 events, but he might very well have bought in more than 60 times with re-entries.
That's an odd way to think about an overall Series result when the player bought into tournaments ranging from $1.5 to $250K. Clearly, aggregate monetary performance in the series is wildly inaccurate considering all buy-ins as the same weighting.
But yes, Daniel is highly likely to end down a relatively small amount for the Series in aggregate. Let's stop the presses with the news that a Series MTT grinder will have lost money, shocking as it appears to some with sour intent.
I am not going to suck him off, regardless of whether he is into that sort of thing.
Look at the winners of the PPC. That is huge. He has results. I don't think he is a superstar now if he ever was. However, he does OK overall in the high stakes tournaments he plays.
what results? in the last 10 years is he even up at wsop?
last 5 years?
cherry picking an inevitable bink when he enters so many events isn't having the results.
People want to say variance that's why he's down blah blah blah then ignore the variance that goes into actually finally winning an event.
Like let's just ignore years of results and pick the one we like!
And to be clear it's fine he cares more about bracelets than money at this point. If he's happier losing overall and winning a bracelet then good for him he had a successful summer. It actually makes total sense to be that someone who is already rich cares about things other than money making him happy.
But this is an entirely different argument than people saying he's great at poker and proved it by winning the PPC.
Variance is hard for everyone. But especially for Daniel.
Even after decades of dedicating his life to a probabilistic game, he has not developed an intuitive understanding of the math. The two hands he was bitching and moaning about -- the two hands that tilted him out of his mind - were three way preflop all ins 1) AK, AJ, AT and 2) KK, AK, JJ
Yes, AK and KK are slightly favorites at 57% and 55% to win, but not hugely so. He is basically complaining about losing two flips in two different tournaments.
This lack of understanding will eventually crush his soul.
We are not even favorites to win two 70-30 in a row because 0.7 X 0.7 = 0.49. When we do hold two 70-30s in a row, we don't consider ourselves lucky. We just take it for granted. Variance is counter-intuitive. We take enormous good luck for granted. And we complain about every bad luck. This is similar to life in general as modern humans especially in western societies are super entitled. One reason I like poker so much is it's such a perfect microcosm of life in general.
During long phases of his poker career, several times Daniel ran at 90-95th percentile of variance. And that skewed his expectations forever.
I was at the same table as his first bullet at 1500 six-max PLO. He played very poorly. Was getting insanely lucky (doubled his stack on hitting a non nut flush draw on the turn on a paired flop after calling pot on flop) and then torched his 3x starting and 2x average stack in two hands 1) with one pair AA in a preflop 3bet pot after getting checkraised pot on the flop when the whole table knew AA was no good and 2) chasing a flush draw and a gutter on a paired board.
And PLO is apparently his best game. Just prior to torching his stack, he said in his vlog - "it is so unfair that they let me play at this table where there is not even a tier 3 player and I have such a huge edge".
Eventually he fired 3 bullets and mincashed with a net loss. 3000 - 1500 x 3 = negative 1500. But he earned some POY points with the min cash. This is the story of tourney grinders with no bankroll constraints. Cashes and POY points don't mean positive ROI.
Also abundantly clear from Jeremy Becker / Landon Tice crossbook how hard it is to print positive ROI. Both of them are undoubtedly way above the playing pool skill-wise but Jeremy is at -25K and Landon is at -70K for the series.
You need one big win or several final table finishes. And Daniel is negative even after a big win at PPC.
Like Billy (DGAF) who among all living humans probably has the keenest appreciation of what poker variance truly is says all the time - "never make poker a living".
Poker is a great hobby, but a terrible profession.
I wonder if Daniel is up in terms of total buy-ins during the WSOP. It looks to me like he cashed for a total of about 60 buy-ins (mostly from winning 23 in the PPC and 17 in the Kick-Off). He probably didn’t play 60 events, but he might very well have bought in more than 60 times with re-entries.
That's an odd way to think about an overall Series result when the player bought into tournaments ranging from $1.5 to $250K. Clearly, aggregate monetary performance in the series is wildly inaccurate considering all buy-ins as the same weighting.
But yes, Daniel is highly likely to end down a relatively small amount for the Series in aggregate. Let's stop the presses with the news that a Series MTT grinder will have lost money, shocking as it appears to some with sour intent.
The bolded in your two posts is precisely the case Daniel continually made in his 2023 vlog series. In terms of buy-ins, he said, he had a hugely successful WSOP. However, the result in terms of $ was way in the red because he tended to do well in the lower buy-in events and poorly in the higher-stake events. Just another form of variance in tourney poker.
Those of us who only looked at the bottom line were haters and idiots who didn't get it blah blah.
Sure, I get what he was going for. Imagine I offered you 100 coin flips, even money per throw, but for varying amounts each time. In the end, I won a whopping 65 of the 100. However, the 65 I won totaled $8,000, while the 35 you won totaled $15,000. By Daniel's logic, I won this contest because, well, 65 is more than 35. The only reason you won more money was that your wins happened to for larger amounts overall. I won, Daniel would say, but you got luckier. Variance.
Of course, any thinking person knows this analogy falters, because unlike a coin flip, not all tourneys are created equally. And a given player has different odds for or against him at different buy-in levels. But in Daniel's mind, he is so skilled that he has similar ROI in any tourney he enters, regardless of buy-in. I think it's delusional, but then his $50K PPC win kind of shits on my point.
Update: Daniel is now down -$134,287 after winning $1,178,703 in the $50k Poker Players Championship event.
Daniel has one more re-buy in the $25k H.O.R.S.E. event available to him, and today has a $3K PLO event starting, which we all know, PLO is his best game, so he might be able to dig himself out of the hole, and hopefully finish up for the series.
People REALLY struggle to understand how someone can be down in the series while winning 1.1 million.
Literally it comes down to the 250k tournament, that's it.
When you fire 2 bullets and no cash, you're down 500k. That's a pretty easy way to assess why he would be down money. Not even bringing into the consideration that he bricked the other high roller events.
This is like watching people learn how to count for the first time lol. Its EXTREMELY simple to understand how he's down money.
People REALLY struggle to understand how someone can be down in the series while winning 1.1 million.
Literally it comes down to the 250k tournament, that's it.
When you fire 2 bullets and no cash, you're down 500k. That's a pretty easy way to assess why he would be down money. Not even bringing into the consideration that he bricked the other high roller events.
This is like watching people learn how to count for the first time lol. Its EXTREMELY simple to understand how he's down money.
Pretty sure everyone understands how to add and subtract.
The answer is simple indeed. Daniel Negreanu anno 2024 is bad at poker
Ausmus is currently #4 in the money list for this series with 3.45m in cashes.
I'm pretty sure you could max out every single event, and he wouldn't be down for the wsop series.
Yeah, even Daniel Negreanu would struggle to lose $3.45 million in one wsop series.
crazy thing is if he did not catch 2 7th streets in the 50k and min cashed it instead . his losses would be a Milly more and his state of mind def not good.
It's nothing to do with adding and subtracting, it's understanding that his overall results are massively levered to one tournament. So people are losing their mind because he didn't cash one (solitary) event.
He also binked an event by getting super lucky multiple times that in most years he won't bink.
Daniel fell off his horse last night in the $25K High Roller H.O.R.S.E. event.
He can fire another bullet at it today.
Welp, the second bullet missed its mark.
The website pokernewsdotcom has Daniel re-entering the $25K H.O.R.S.E event and getting thrown off his horse within the first hour of today's play.
Daniel then, like a drunken cowboy
who was recently thrown from his horse, wandered over to the $3K PLO event, which we all know is Daniel's best game.
You can't make this stuff up.
The bolded in your two posts is precisely the case Daniel continually made in his 2023 vlog series. In terms of buy-ins, he said, he had a hugely successful WSOP. However, the result in terms of $ was way in the red because he tended to do well in the lower buy-in events and poorly in the higher-stake events. Just another form of variance in tourney poker.
Those of us who only looked at the bottom line were haters and idiots who didn't get it blah blah.
Sure, I get what he was going for. Imagine
It does not. He played a bunch of high rollers and lost.
