Vote for DTD, Blondepoker, Flushy and Grandad in the British Poker Awards

[mondatoo]

Not naming names but in the cash category at least half for certain and probably the majority have had a losing year in cash

Which is the equivalent of nominating me for live tournament success

And poker awards are definitely a waste of time. If someone has won 2m online in cash why the hell would they want a trophy

But then why does an actor give a shit about winning an oscar when he/she's getting paid 20 million a film ?

BTW I agree it's bollocks just wonder why ?

[Moskvich]

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? Whereas poker is essentially a selfish occupation - no-one plays to entertain or enlighten others; they just play to make themselves money. Why on earth should other people want to give them an award for that? (On top of which, even if they do want to give them an award, how can they possibly make any sort of judgment as to whom it should go to?)

(I've no interest in awards for other stuff either, but poker awards are clearly even more ridiculous).

[GreekStein]

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? Whereas poker is essentially a selfish occupation - no-one plays to entertain or enlighten others; they just play to make themselves money. Why on earth should other people want to give them an award for that? (On top of which, even if they do want to give them an award, how can they possibly make any sort of judgment as to whom it should go to?)

(I've no interest in awards for other stuff either, but poker awards are clearly even more ridiculous).

good post

[Indestructable]

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? Whereas poker is essentially a selfish occupation - no-one plays to entertain or enlighten others; they just play to make themselves money. Why on earth should other people want to give them an award for that? (On top of which, even if they do want to give them an award, how can they possibly make any sort of judgment as to whom it should go to?)

(I've no interest in awards for other stuff either, but poker awards are clearly even more ridiculous).

good post

So poker players aren't entertaining to watch.  As to subjectivity, no difference with the Oscars etc. Think some of you have been taking too many grumpy pills.

[Jon MW]

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? Whereas poker is essentially a selfish occupation - no-one plays to entertain or enlighten others; they just play to make themselves money. Why on earth should other people want to give them an award for that? (On top of which, even if they do want to give them an award, how can they possibly make any sort of judgment as to whom it should go to?)

(I've no interest in awards for other stuff either, but poker awards are clearly even more ridiculous).

good post

No it isn't.

There are hundreds of different acting awards, your argument would mean that all of them are worthwhile.

But some awards are wanted and others nobody cares about - it's all down to whether they're respected or not.

[GreekStein]

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? Whereas poker is essentially a selfish occupation - no-one plays to entertain or enlighten others; they just play to make themselves money. Why on earth should other people want to give them an award for that? (On top of which, even if they do want to give them an award, how can they possibly make any sort of judgment as to whom it should go to?)

(I've no interest in awards for other stuff either, but poker awards are clearly even more ridiculous).

good post

No it isn't.

There are hundreds of different acting awards, your argument would mean that all of them are worthwhile.

But some awards are wanted and others nobody cares about - it's all down to whether they're respected or not.

Yes it is.

I'm not sure you read Moskvich's post Mr Cowboy sir but please re-read.

[Jon MW]

...
But then why does an actor give a shit about winning an oscar when he/she's getting paid 20 million a film ?
...

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? ...

Moskvich's supposition is that actors 'give a shit' about winning an oscar because they provide entertainment and are getting awards to recognise that.

But if that was the reason why actors cared about oscars then they would care just as much about every type of award.

The TV Quick Awards are to recognise that the actors have given some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others - but it would be hard to argue that actors care as much about that as they would about an oscar.

The gist of Moskvichs post is true, but his reason is only a relatively unimportant part of the whole picture - it's a long way from being the defining reason why actors care about awards (and care about some more than others).

QED
Therefore, it's an ok post, not a good one

[redarmi]

Judging by the fact you can buy tickets to this "prestigious" event for a hundred quid a go they are clearly not pointless.  For the organisers at least.  You do seem to get entry into  fifty quid freezout though so that should persuade Ivey and Durrr to attend.

[remf]

...
But then why does an actor give a shit about winning an oscar when he/she's getting paid 20 million a film ?
...

Because actors or sportsmen or whatever give some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others by doing what they do, and awards to them recognise that? ...

Moskvich's supposition is that actors 'give a shit' about winning an oscar because they provide entertainment and are getting awards to recognise that.

But if that was the reason why actors cared about oscars then they would care just as much about every type of award.

The TV Quick Awards are to recognise that the actors have given some sort of pleasure/entertainment to others - but it would be hard to argue that actors care as much about that as they would about an oscar.

The gist of Moskvichs post is true, but his reason is only a relatively unimportant part of the whole picture - it's a long way from being the defining reason why actors care about awards (and care about some more than others).

QED
Therefore, it's an ok post, not a good one

This post made me smile very much,good answer 

[The Camel]

Judging by the fact you can buy tickets to this "prestigious" event for a hundred quid a go they are clearly not pointless.  For the organisers at least.  You do seem to get entry into  fifty quid freezout though so that should persuade Ivey and Durrr to attend.

It would be really really funny if those nominated had to pay for their tickets to the event.

I wonder which nominated players would still go?

[Indestructable]

Its not that unusual to be honest.
I have attend awards events where I have been nominated and have booked tables at a cost. Obviously this is the same position for winners and losers. A lot depends on how much sponsorship they have for the event as to whether they need to charge or not.
I am not trying to defend each individual award as there are some ommisions, but this is down to opinions on individuals and the Cash player is a difficult one to judge.
But if you think of everything that Tikay has done for poker, or the year Flushy has had surely they deserve to win awards?

[DaveShoelace]

My understanding is that those nominated are invited along for free.

[nirvana]

Most awards events are money spinners for the organisers, which is the sole reason they exist.

[Chompy]

Dean Morris cruelly overlooked again

[nirvana]

Dean Morris cruelly overlooked again

And that's why these lists are such nonsense