Negreanu borrows $100,000 in HSP - Page 2

Mark1808 · #11 07-05-2006, 05:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]

OK. I'll say what everyone else was thinking. You're an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You get no argument from me on that one, but my thinking may run a little deeper than you give me credit for. First off, the way Jennifer Tilley is hoovering around its obviuos she has a financial stake in Laak. Its also apparent by Antonio's comments that Laak has never lent $100,000 before. So, he is probably lending Tilley's money and I wonder how she feels about it. Now, I have no doubt Negraneau is good for it but his need to borrow interests me. I run a fairly high stakes poker game and I regularly lend several thousand dollars to players who run short, who are perenial losers, to keep the game going. The winners usually bring plenty of cash, although occasionally they can run short. My main point goes to preparedness and professionalism. While I am sure loans are made all the time and are paid back easily, I would doubt players like Chip Reese, Barry Greenstein or Doyle Brunson are borrowing money. Just an observation, that's all. Negreanu strike me as a man with a gambling problem.

I also love how everyone assumes all high stakes players are loaded and can easily afford anything without seeing financial statements. Having been in the financial and investment business for 30 years I can tell you more people are on the edge of financial disaster then you realize.

Negreanu came to the game with $1 million, far more than anyone else, and now he has to borrow $100,000. Given his style of play and his comments I find that very funny.

I may be an idiot, but I never had to borrow money at a poker game.

Sykes · #12 07-05-2006, 05:43 PM

I'm pretty sure that Brunson/Reese/Greenstein put out markers just like Negraneau does.

Just because you need more $ doesn't mean you're a loser in the game.

And, no he did not come into the game with 1 million. That was last year.

Mark1808 · #13 07-05-2006, 05:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that Brunson/Reese/Greenstein put out markers just like Negraneau does.

Just because you need more $ doesn't mean you're a loser in the game.

And, no he did not come into the game with 1 million. That was last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wonder why he changed his strategy? If a million buy in was good last season, why not this one?

Obviously anyone can run short. But given a players style, blinds and relative chip stacks you know how much money you will need. Given Negreanu's style of playing every hand and looking everyone up, he should have plenty on him, that's why the million buy in last year made sense. Now I know its a close network and they all play together all the time so paying back is no big deal. I'm just getting a read, that's all.

ShakeZula06 · #14 07-05-2006, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Given Negreanu's style of playing every hand and looking everyone up, he should have plenty on him, that's why the million buy in last year made sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you insisting that this is his style?

Sykes · #15 07-05-2006, 06:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that Brunson/Reese/Greenstein put out markers just like Negraneau does.

Just because you need more $ doesn't mean you're a loser in the game.

And, no he did not come into the game with 1 million. That was last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wonder why he changed his strategy? If a million buy in was good last season, why not this one?

Obviously anyone can run short. But given a players style, blinds and relative chip stacks you know how much money you will need. Given Negreanu's style of playing every hand and looking everyone up, he should have plenty on him, that's why the million buy in last year made sense. Now I know its a close network and they all play together all the time so paying back is no big deal. I'm just getting a read, that's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because last year there were at least 3 other people with half a million+ on the table.

This year there was 0.

Seriously, stop talking. If he was really in monetary troubles, you think he would ask for a loan on TV where 1 million + are watching?

Mark1808 · #16 07-05-2006, 06:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Because last year there were at least 3 other people with half a million+ on the table.

This year there was 0.

Seriously, stop talking. If he was really in monetary troubles, you think he would ask for a loan on TV where 1 million + are watching?

[/ QUOTE ]

When Negreanu was playing heads up matches at the Winns there was speculation he was at least partially staked, I have no idea. I do not know how he did, but I thought he lost a little, I could be wrong.

I agree that Negreanu is probably loaded and that loaning money is no big deal between these guys, and the loans for the most part of a matter of convenience rather than neccesity, but if there are a million people watching and I were Negreanu I would realize that some viewers are dumb [censored] and would not request a loan on camera.

Another poster wanted to know why I insist DN is a loose player and it is based on the hands I have seen him play on TV, this is all I can go by as I have never played with him. His VPIP seems quite high to me.

Negreanu is genius and a great poker player. I just think he has a gambling problem, and like Gus Hansen, I think it will get him in trouble.

DeuceKicker · #17 07-05-2006, 06:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You get no argument from me on that one, but my thinking may run a little deeper than you give me credit for. First off, the way Jennifer Tilley is hoovering around its obviuos she has a financial stake in Laak. Its also apparent by Antonio's comments that Laak has never lent $100,000 before. So, he is probably lending Tilley's money and I wonder how she feels about it. Now, I have no doubt Negraneau is good for it but his need to borrow interests me. I run a fairly high stakes poker game and I regularly lend several thousand dollars to players who run short, who are perenial losers, to keep the game going. The winners usually bring plenty of cash, although occasionally they can run short. My main point goes to preparedness and professionalism. While I am sure loans are made all the time and are paid back easily, I would doubt players like Chip Reese, Barry Greenstein or Doyle Brunson are borrowing money. Just an observation, that's all. Negreanu strike me as a man with a gambling problem.

I also love how everyone assumes all high stakes players are loaded and can easily afford anything without seeing financial statements. Having been in the financial and investment business for 30 years I can tell you more people are on the edge of financial disaster then you realize.

Negreanu came to the game with $1 million, far more than anyone else, and now he has to borrow $100,000. Given his style of play and his comments I find that very funny.

I may be an idiot, but I never had to borrow money at a poker game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, you're reading wayyyy too much into things.

Jennifer Tilley is hovering around Phil because they live together (more importantly, she probably wants free face-time). I doubt any of the money he's playing with is hers. Besides, he was up $200K and was leaving, so he wasn't lending Jennifer's money.

If you read BarryG's site, you'll see that he often lends/borrows from Mimi Tran (or at least used to).

So Laak busted his $100K cherry. Big deal.

Mark1808 · #18 07-05-2006, 06:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Dude, you're reading wayyyy too much into things.

Jennifer Tilley is hovering around Phil because they live together (more importantly, she probably wants free face-time). I doubt any of the money he's playing with is hers. Besides, he was up $200K and was leaving, so he wasn't lending Jennifer's money.

If you read BarryG's site, you'll see that he often lends/borrows from Mimi Tran (or at least used to).

So Laak busted his $100K cherry. Big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

How come the other players don't have their lovers standing behind them looking very concerned everytime they are in a hand? Barry G had a relationship with Mimi Tran, the same way Tilley and Laak have a relationship that is why I think she is staking him. Academy award winners don't need face time on a third rate cable channel.

Regarding the other posters comments about Negreanu's lower buy in this year, as long as you have everyone covered, what differance does it make how much you buy in for? If Negreanu is so loaded and thinks its cool to sit down with $1 million why didn't he do it again? I will give you three guesses.

Prodigy54321 · #19 07-05-2006, 07:00 PM

Negreanu > Matusow

Mark1808 · #20 07-05-2006, 07:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Negreanu > Matusow

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rather hang out with Negreanu any day, but I believe they both have addiction problems. Everyone has some kind of problem, I am not faulting DN, he is a great player! I played at the table next to Matusow at Bellagio and never heard him utter a word. I think he plays up to the cameras big time.