Published on
Update on

Daniel Negreanu wants to make some changes to the WSOP Poker Hall of Fame as it doesn’t reflect the current state of the game.

Which players are worth of a place among poker’s elite? Every year the community nominates its players.

Would things be different if Negreanu was in charge? Would Todd Brunson and Carlos Mortenson have received the most from the judges after they made it through the public nomination process?

Confusion Needs to be Cleared Up

Negreanu believes the WSOP Poker Hall of Fame could benefit from some tweaks, despite congratulating his friends on their latest achievements.

He essentially calls for changing the voting system and great clarity while discussing his ideas on the Full Contact Poker blog.

Negreanu correctly points out that the term “high stakes” is relative. The WSOP states that any nominee must have “player for high stakes”, but in his opinion, this criteria to too vague outdated.

The poker scene has drastically changed and nowadays super high rollers easily play high stakes for $1,000/$2,000. Ten years ago, $100/$200 may have been high stakes for these same players, while for others high stakes might still be $5/$10.

Negreanu believes that we should set the following limits, given the relative ambiguity of the term:

$50/$100 for No Limit cash games

$400/$800 for Limit cash games

$10,000+ buy-ins for tournaments

Since Negreanu played at the top of the poker tree for many years, this does seem a much clearer way to define the limits. Of course, these limits could still be a matter of debate.

Unbalanced Voting

The way votes are cast is another issue that Negreanu wants to address. A combination of media members and existing Hall of Famers are given ten votes each, only after a batch of players has been set by the general public.

This leads to some unbalanced voting, as the system is “broken”, according to Negreanu.

Negreanu calls for some changes to the voting system. He wants the voters to rank their picks #1 and #2, so the voters would only get two votes, instead of ten.

Of course, Negreanu is not out to criticize the players who have benefited from the current system. He is just looking for some debate on the issue. Can Negreanu change the system?