Daniel Negreanu question.

[SuuPRlim]

all very true. loads of people though have had lucky breaks and not had the talent/knowledge/energy/drive to capitalise and whatever we think of Dnegs defo can't say that about him.

[Doobs]

all very true. loads of people though have had lucky breaks and not had the talent/knowledge/energy/drive to capitalise and whatever we think of Dnegs defo can't say that about him.

I am not denegrating him in anyway.  I fully recognise a large amount of my success in poker was down timing too.  I was also born in a succesful country, could have bought a house that was cheap, and am white male.  Running good.

You see the luck thing everywhere.  I am doing a contract where I worked 20 years ago, and there a few people there that I used to work with who have done very well through jobs, property, pensions etc.  I know other who left who were just as bright, worked just as hard, joined companies that then closed, have had multiple forced moves, not found it easy to get decent work etc.  Randomness is huge.   

I work with someone who talks about how I am very unlucky because of a few very minor bad things that have happened over the last few months.  I just can't persuade him otherwise.   His logically thought process is terrible.

Negreanu appears to have worked hard, but has almost certainly run really good too.

[mikeymike]

I know he posted his tournament winnings it would be interesting to know how his cash games went over the same period.

[teddybloat]

timing was / is everything.

talent and charisma without opportunity wont equate to much

he was able to cash in on his personaility at a time when poker was a spectator sport.

he was able to cash in on his talent at a time when games where soft and juicy.

if we could take the negraeau of 1998 and place him in 2018 and place him the same 'x' percentile of the world's top players, i dont think he has anywhere near the same sucess in 99% of those universes.

[Gemini Kings]

I couldn't allocate percentages as far as talent, charisma etc is concerned but he's got to where is through talent. Although it's a harder game now than when he first hit the big time he remains up there with the best when many others have fallen away. That's proof that he has the talent to stick at the the top.

He's a thinking player and has over the years verbalised his hand analysis during and after hands at the table. This has helped many to learn the game and inspired many more. The only weakness I can see in his game is that he often works out when he's beat in a hand but then calls anyway.

I suspect he'll be around for many years yet as he's shown that he continues to work on his game and seeks to continually learn from other top players. That shows humility on his part and although he thrives on the limelight he hasn't got an inflated ego about the game.

He also has an excellent temperament, which is no doubt a factor in being able to remain objective when playing.

Is he perfect?

No.

But I have a great deal of respect for him and his ability. Hopefully one day I'll get to sit at the same table in tournament.