Is Daniel right or wrong?

[sedlacekj]

Is Daniel right?

I think Daniel is essentially correct regarding what makes a particular person great for Poker. He isn't saying what makes someone good at Poker, but what about a person is good for Poker as an entity. Some of the negativity about his statement got these two mixed up. The list he gives also relates to what kind of person is good for any company or hobby. People like he describes encourage more people to be involved. Think of the difference between Army recruiters and drill sergeants. One kind of person gets others to join, while the other likely doesn't. People who are good for Poker encourage new players to join, get media attention positive toward Poker (possibly to benefit positive legislation), and make connections to other corporations for investments (also can help widen the public view on Poker). The traits he describes are good for that. To appreciate Daniel's statement, people need to understand what effective realm he is talking about. The naysayers simply don't have this frame of reference.

 

[Pete Ski]

Sounds to me like he is describing the ideal table that he would like to play at. Who wouldn't want to be at a table of loose social people? It make the game a lot more fun. But, make no mistake he is there to out think, outplay, and stack you if he gets the chance. If I were at this table it would be my game plan.

 

[jadestem]

I feel like people are really over thinking this. It's not very hard. Let's look at each trait individually. I want you to imagine playing in a room where EVERY other player has the same trait.

Winning player - pretty easy. If every other player at your local card room were a winner, you would not continue to play for very long. They would all just be splitting up your money. Losing players are good for the game.

Slow - if every other person took a long time on every turn to act it would be absolutely miserable. That's not to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take time to make big decisions. But the routine stuff should go pretty fast. People who keep focused on the game and aren't caught off guard every time it is their turn are better for the game.

Quiet - this is the one where some people will say "I don't care as long as I'm winning." And that's fine. But I think that most people would pretty quickly grow tired of playing with only headphones and hoodie guys.

Nit - another pretty easy one. If every other player were a nit the game would be pretty awful. The game needs people that play looser.

Negative - who would want to play where every player is negative and complaining all the time?

Basically Daniel is just suggesting that people should be mindful of the experience that new players/fish are getting. If they are just showing up to lose their money to a table full of guys that can't be bothered to say hello or that berate them when they do win a hand instead of just saying nice hand and moving along, then the new players/fish aren't likely to be too keen on coming back.

 

[xOneCoolHandx]

I think that everyone who sits down at a table (whether virtual or live) is good for the game. You need different styles and different personalities or the game would be the same all the time. One of the biggest challenges (and most rewarding accomplishments outside of winning lots of money) in poker (for me) is figuring the playing style, patterns, preferences and aggressiveness of those I am playing against on how to use their tendencies against them.

Daniel is one of my all time favorite players, and honestly, I think he was trying to be funny with these statements. I think he earnestly enjoys playing the game no matter who is at his table (as long as they have $$$...lol)

 

[n3rv]

He isn't really right or wrong. The old guard have been complaining about the new regs for years. It is true the new style is 'bad for the game' but so is increasing rake.

 

[MarineCJ]

Who Care really? Its his opinion. This is still America. But now it seems land of offended more than land of the free.

 

[topcatbrazil]

A polarizing figure like Daniel Negreanu knows that when he opens his mouth, critics will be there ready to argue. So, Daniel tweeted characteristics of a poker player who is good and bad for poker, and some felt his comments were “arrogant” and out of line. What is your opinion of Daniel's list?


Daniel Negreanu Shares Five Things That Make a Player ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ for Poker

It was actually a joke. To call bad players winners shows that he meant well.

 

[ACEWOLF56]

I honestly think Daniel is entitled to his opinion and people have to take it as just that, an opinion, nothing more nothing less. No one man is above poker. Poker is universal and cosmic; greater than the people (us) who play it. It has us all, no matter how we may play, because we love the game. And the love of the game is all that really matters for the game of poker to truly evolve, opinions or no opinions.

 

[danntesvarna]

When I read list i make a little smile.He is my mentor.
He is impressive person and everybody should listen and learn from him.
I have his book"Hold`em Wisdom for all player-it`s simple script
,but you start imagine all the game.
I like to watch him in PCA Super High roller.Good times all.

 

[gallocobain]

There are many people today crying and fighting on the social media like kids! Pick up the phone call to him and go ahead!

 

[xxgsaint5501xx]

A polarizing figure like Daniel Negreanu knows that when he opens his mouth, critics will be there ready to argue. So, Daniel tweeted characteristics of a poker player who is good and bad for poker, and some felt his comments were “arrogant” and out of line. What is your opinion of Daniel's list?


Daniel Negreanu Shares Five Things That Make a Player ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ for Poker

I believe that he is wrong when he says 2 out of five traits are bad for poker. There is nothing wrong with being a quiet winner. As long as the table is not full of players sharing these two characteristics, imo it is completely fine if you are a winning player who is not the life of the party.

 

[Kraanjhb7]

I think he is entitled to his oppinion and I agree with it. Was finding some of if it funny and cant actually believe people were offended. Maybe its just because he said it.

 

[John_3_16]

Just one more butt hole in a large world of butt holes making farting noises. In the largest scheme, one fart is no more important than another. Butt holes pass gas. That is what they do. Some simply pass gas from both ends at times. THAT goes against the larger design of things.

Ignore them & maybe they will roll over & pass their gas in another direction downwind from us.

I am guessing anyone taking this thread very serious already has plenty to eat, a roof over their heads & pretty good health. Of course, all meaningless, when compared to Daniel's opinions. Right? Uh huh!

 

[xpvictor1]

Does it really matter?

Why do I care what a stranger to me thinks of me or labels me? Daniel has his opinion and I simply regard it as an opinion. Have you seen the frozen movie? My advice is : "Let it go, let it go".

 

[carmenzu]

Fame is like that, talk about me does not matter that they speak badly...

 

[kolyasik77777]

What can I say, a talkative populist. It can not be taken seriously at all.

 

[theRaven68]

why should anybody cares about his opinion, he is poker player, maybe good one, but his thinking is irrelevant

 

[valanddon]

I think daniel is caught up in the stardom scene, and thinks his oppinion is always right.

 

[nobodysf00l]

I Like It

A polarizing figure like Daniel Negreanu knows that when he opens his mouth, critics will be there ready to argue. So, Daniel tweeted characteristics of a poker player who is good and bad for poker, and some felt his comments were “arrogant” and out of line. What is your opinion of Daniel's list?


Daniel Negreanu Shares Five Things That Make a Player ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ for Poker I like it, alot!

I like that he dares to be himself and is willing to take some heavy heat for things he believes in...whether we agree on a particular subject or not.










2]

 

[belizebum]

I love Daniel, so that might cloud my judgement. He says winners are no good for poker, but someone has to win, someone has to lose. He can be a bit to talkative at a table too. Hmmm, what do you have? AA, AJ, QQ, etc. Sure he is right sometimes, but just make a decision already...lol. Still love ya Daniel.

 

[Millie232]

I think he's perfectly right. Poker needs "losing" players just as much as any game because otherwise there could be no winning players - however I don't think that's what he meant. I think including "winner" at the top of the list was intentional, because he means a winner with the four following traits: slow, quiet, nit, hater. If you win, but you tank every time you do it, slow the game down, only play premium hands because you're scared, never talk to anybody and are constantly in "grind" mode then yes, I'd agree you're one of the worst people I've met at the table. Meanwhile, I'd happily give my money to somebody who I'm having fun playing against, getting a good conversation, and who isn't taking ages to do it.

 

[pawelmad9]

Its very funny video haters gone be jealous good for him

 

[tomk7788]

Sounds like Daniel likes playing with jovial, bad players who have a good time losing large amounts of money to him.

 

[frank174]

Daniel was way out of line he is painting with a pretty wide brush

 

[terryk]

He's a multi-millionaire,and has a smokin hot wife,,,,of course he's right!