Daniel Negreanu's Latest Cardplayer Article

[Squareview]

david needs a nap

[SGspecial]

[x] Franchise 60 delivers!

[bustedromo]

In partial defense of Slansky, I don't see him going broke any time soon, or ever actually (unless he falls prey to the SDRR lifestyle).

The big mistake I think some of these young internet poker stars are making is they view poker as a sport, as opposed to an unbounded game with a significant component of chaos.

They seem to seek out competition against certain players because they wish to prove themselves better, or because they perceive that that is how they will become better.

Seems I've read a few anecdotes on these forums of certain players going busto in their obsession to beat certain other players in a quest to prove who's the best.

[David Sklansky]

Obviously, I wasn't twisting your words on purpose. Since anyone could read them themselves. But it sure seemed to me that you were extolling the virtues of those who move up the ladder in a less than methodical way compared to those who approach it more like blackjack players.

And it should be noted that the more methodical strategy is actually the one that will most likely have you playing at the highest game your talents indicate you should be at, in the shortest possible time. This is especially true if you are a notch below world class. The Johnny strategy is a big favorite to keep knocking you down and wasting time in your quest to reach your potential.

The point is though that there is no reason to risk going broke as you move up the ladder. And there are plenty of players above the 80-160 level who follow that precept.

[Bellagibro]

Moving up and down stakes is a skill in itself. I know way too many good poker players that moved to far up in relation to their skill level and bankroll and went busto because they couldn't move back down.

In the example DN gives Johnny was smart enough to take a shot and move back down when he got beat up and built up the skills required to beat the bigger games.

[ProfessorBen]

Lost in this internet penis duel is a decent point or two that has been overlooked in favor of "ZOMG DN OWNINED." Specifically, here are some points that I saw mentioned in this article/debate that are worth thinking about anytime you want to move up.

1. Ask for help: I don't just mean the "read poker books, post on 2p2" kind of help either. Johnny's actions in DN's article exemplify some of the help I'm talking about. Get a stake/action sharing if the jump in limits is too big. Aside from the irony that Larry would be gambling by helping Johnny out(remember though, he does like to live vicariously through Johnny [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]), he is correct in cushioning the blows by getting someone to take a piece of his action if he's not ready for a complete limit jump. If you're sitting at a table with a good player, develop a connection and review hands after. Tell him your situation if you're not going to be playing with him often.

2. Variance is not your friend: This should also be obvious, but here are some related points. Don't tilt. Don't splurge winnings after good sessions. Don't get in over your head after running good for awhile. Don't tilt. Be prepared for variance to kick in at anytime. When taking shots, pick games that are so good that your winrate significantly decreases the impact of variance.(this is inherently difficult because many good games are High EV, High Variance) Don't [censored] tilt.

3. Define your limits: Straight from the article...
[ QUOTE ]
The only way that a "wannabe" Johnny can ever be successful is to find out where his "Larry level" is and stick with it. That is, he eventually needs to find the highest limit he can beat and be satisfied with that. In fact, a lot of Johnny wannabes will actually become winning players in the $10-$20 no-limit hold'em game, but losers in bigger games. It takes a lot of introspection to come to that realization, and the reason there are so many failed Johnnys is that it's an extremely difficult pill to swallow for that type of personality.

[/ QUOTE ] I agree everything up the heart of this quote and agree with the bolded section the most. In regards to the part after, I say "[censored] that. Continue to learn more, play better, and grow. Those of you who think I'm being naive should remember the other points in this post.

4. Becoming a better poker player has value, both inherent and expected.: You will make more money in the future and be a more interesting and intellectual human being. This is obvious, but ignoring your time and variance for now, this also means that playing a game that is neutral EV also has value, if you're getting better.

5. However, all shot-takers aren't created equal: If you're not going to learn to the best of your ability(not playing to the best of your ability should be out of question), you are going to pay, because even in this neutral EV game, you're paying in variance, uncertainty and time. If you can't focus on the cards and black out the Dodger game at that exact moment, you are better off grinding at your normal game.

I recently took a shot at a 40/80 live LHE game(I've only logged a few hundred hours at 20/40 and never any higher) and it cost me half an hour(game broke), $700+, and a touch of my confidence, but it was most I have learned about poker in any 24-hour session. However, if I hadn't spent every hand of that session following the action down to the most minute detail and pestered a player much better than myself about my play and every possible tangent associated with it(What to do on a slightly different flop/villain/position), it wouldn't have been worth my time.



Thank you. We now return you to your normally scheduled e-peen.

[NinaWilliams]

[ QUOTE ]
Lost in this internet penis duel is a decent point or two that has been overlooked in favor of "ZOMG DN OWNINED." Specifically, here are some points that I saw mentioned in this article/debate that are worth thinking about anytime you want to move up.

1. Ask for help: I don't just mean the "read poker books, post on 2p2" kind of help either. Johnny's actions in DN's article exemplify some of the help I'm talking about. Get a stake/action sharing if the jump in limits is too big. Aside from the irony that Larry would be gambling by helping Johnny out(remember though, he does like to live vicariously through Johnny [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]), he is correct in cushioning the blows by getting someone to take a piece of his action if he's not ready for a complete limit jump. If you're sitting at a table with a good player, develop a connection and review hands after. Tell him your situation if you're not going to be playing with him often.

2. Variance is not your friend: This should also be obvious, but here are some related points. Don't tilt. Don't splurge winnings after good sessions. Don't get in over your head after running good for awhile. Don't tilt. Be prepared for variance to kick in at anytime. When taking shots, pick games that are so good that your winrate significantly decreases the impact of variance.(this is inherently difficult because many good games are High EV, High Variance) Don't [censored] tilt.

3. Define your limits: Straight from the article...
[ QUOTE ]
The only way that a "wannabe" Johnny can ever be successful is to find out where his "Larry level" is and stick with it. That is, he eventually needs to find the highest limit he can beat and be satisfied with that. In fact, a lot of Johnny wannabes will actually become winning players in the $10-$20 no-limit hold'em game, but losers in bigger games. It takes a lot of introspection to come to that realization, and the reason there are so many failed Johnnys is that it's an extremely difficult pill to swallow for that type of personality.

[/ QUOTE ] I agree everything up the heart of this quote and agree with the bolded section the most. In regards to the part after, I say "[censored] that. Continue to learn more, play better, and grow. Those of you who think I'm being naive should remember the other points in this post.

4. Becoming a better poker player has value, both inherent and expected.: You will make more money in the future and be a more interesting and intellectual human being. This is obvious, but ignoring your time and variance for now, this also means that playing a game that is neutral EV also has value, if you're getting better.

5. However, all shot-takers aren't created equal: If you're not going to learn to the best of your ability(not playing to the best of your ability should be out of question), you are going to pay, because even in this neutral EV game, you're paying in variance, uncertainty and time. If you can't focus on the cards and black out the Dodger game at that exact moment, you are better off grinding at your normal game.

I recently took a shot at a 40/80 live LHE game(I've only logged a few hundred hours at 20/40 and never any higher) and it cost me half an hour(game broke), $700+, and a jab to my confidence, but it was most I have learned about poker in any 24-hour session. However, if I hadn't spent every hand of that session following the action down to the most minute detail and pestered a player much better than myself about my play and every possible tangent associated with it(What to do on a slightly different flop/villain/position), it wouldn't have been worth my time.



Thank you. We now return you to your normally scheduled e-peen.

[/ QUOTE ]

good post.

[glimmertwin]

[ QUOTE ]
In partial defense of Slansky, I don't see him going broke any time soon, or ever actually (unless Brandi gets her hands on his passwords).


[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[BigBadBabar]

solid post professorben

[JPFisher55]

I have a question. Isn't one problem with moving up in stakes without adequate bankroll a risk simply because it takes some time to know if you can, or cannot, beat the game at the higher stakes?
Without an adequate bankroll, one or two bad sessions might convince you that you cannot beat a game that you can in the long run. OTOH one or two good sessions might convince you that you can beat a game that you cannot in the long run.