$1million loss 'means nothing to me' says Negreanu

3 years ago
$1million loss means nothing to Negreanu
17:29
16 Sep

(Photo: Pokerstars.com)

He’s the fans favorite who regularly tops polls of most likeable poker pro, and he’s not slow in standing up and getting involved in matters which others shy away from – but like many others recently I have some doubts and concerns about Daniel ‘KidPoker’ Negreanu’s real feelings when it comes to the average player.

Just last week the Canadian - who has amassed more money in tournament play than anyone else in the history of the game - gave an interview in which he dismissed possible huge losses:

"If I lost a million in the game, I'm not gonna be like 'Wow that sucks.' It's just whatever.”

Fine. For Daniel $1million is obviously now a drop in the rather vast ocean which is his bankroll and bank balance! But he then goes on to talk about the “entitlement issues” other pros have in relation to invitation only events.

And what about the grinder pros who Daniel’s PokerStars bosses have left out in the cold this past year and for whom he has become an apologist in many people’s eyes? Let’s take a closer look at what the ‘average Joe’ think of Negreanu…



Most popular player ever? Haters gonna hate!

“It seems the consensus is that he's a great ambassador for the game and thus has made the poker world a better place,” said Cooozy on 2+2 forum.

"He gets hate for various reasons, such as being an apologist for scammers like E-Dog, making ridiculous statements and not retracting them like "winning players take more from the poker economy than rake does… promoting … like magical bracelets or Choice Center…”

Cooozy’s view of Negreanu is not the only one. In reply topgunky posted:

"To the negative folks … if you want to spend time thrashing on a pro player, there are plenty of degenerate, criminal, con-artist professional poker players who have become celebrities that are more worthy of your ire. Those pros are the ones that are bad for the game, could care less about anyone or anything, and take more than the rake.”

Well fair enough, but those degens and scammers are not the ones standing up as a ‘PokerStars shill’ and explaining why the changes are good for the players. They are not the ones standing on a mountain of cash and talking about ‘entitlement’; they are not the pros who are being voted ‘most popular pros’ while at the same time bad-mouthing many others in the game.



Missing the point

One of the strangest things I read in his Pokernews interview was this…

"I think online poker would've been better off today if there had never been any high stakes poker online.”

Intrigued, I read on…

"It attracts really smart people that are looking to make millions. They are using tracking software[/quote] they're going to create bots. Any time there's a lot of money to be made somewhere, you attract that. If you leave the game fun, if you leave it low limit, those people don't have the incentive to do that.”

What the actual fuck? For a start, if you ask any average player, they love to hear and read about the nosebleed limits - every poker website will tell you that ‘high-stakes’ articles will get many more hits than the tale of the average Joe, whatever he does. And that’s good and right, because we all need the top of the tree to be something attractive, and special.



I promise to tell the truth, the whole…hang on a minute!

De Woerd wouldn’t be able to look himself in the face if he hadn’t asked Dnegs about the changes PokerStars made and the promises Daniel himself seemed to make.

"You said there was a lot of stuff on the horizon that would change a lot for everyone, but you couldn't talk about it yet,” said De Woerd. “What were you referring to?”

Daniel’s response? “So this has been annoying.” No shit Sherlock! Seriously, it has annoyed people who have a whole lot more reason to be annoyed than you!

"It's a little tilting because I've been hearing people talk about me saying these changes were coming, but I never said that. I was very clear to say, 'I've heard of some promotions, and if they happen, they will blow your mind. I don't know if they will, but if they do, they will blow your mind.' But I didn't promise anything that didn't get delivered.”


True or false? Answers on a postcard

Well, here’s something he actually said:

"I know some of the promotions in store for 2016 and beyond and IMO they are mind blowing. I believe they will work to bring more unique players on to the site than we had in 2015.” And? We all saw nothing-or at least nothing ‘mind-blowing’ to anyone who has a mind!"
"But isn't it the expectations people had that matters?” De Woerd powered on. “Well, I had expectations too. But we had some things to go on throughout the year that changed direction…” he added, citing Baazov’s indictment and subsequent disappearance from Amaya. "I don't see them happening by the end of this year, but I do think there's a decent possibility in the next year or two we could see some of those things come to fruition.”

Well, that’s not the same thing at all, is it Daniel? As SootedPowa wrote:

"It is funny but I am sure the definition of a promotion does not include something where they give nothing back to the players.”



Let the jury decide!

Am I being unfair to Daniel?

Why shouldn’t he say what he wants about ‘losing a million’?

Why can’t he do his PokerStars ambassador role without being subject to the ‘haters’?

Why can’t he be Mr. Popular without being held up to more scrutiny than others?

Let us all know what you think in the comments section below!


Articles 1754

Andrew from Edinburgh, Scotland, is a professional journalist, international-titled chess master, and avid poker player.Read more

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a new comment

No Comments found.