Dylan Linde

@shaundeeb @JeffBNT @padspoker I remember the very high volume folks in like 2010 were at around 40k games played lifetime on stars

@JeffBNT @padspoker I know I was 40+ tabling for 5 years with no days off 14 hours a day I was def playing 200mtt a day for many years with the 180s etc

The grinder of ALL grinders. Tuborg123455 is approaching almost 1 MILLION tournaments played. To put this into context, if you played 20 tournaments, in 4 sessions a week for 10 years you’d “only” have 45760 games. 🙇‍♂️

@Justinyoung07 Recently heard tell of a reg asking to see a mucked ai and the person had misread their hand. Reg couldn’t beat the flush they asked to see.

Same person busts me with the nuts and I hero call the bet. He shows his hand and I tell him “nice bet I had pocket 8s”. He makes the dealer try and find my cards. He is correct in the ruling obv but this is terrible for poker. Try and cheat one hand and use the rules the other

@VictoriaL_64 @OctopiPoker I’m not sure if I’m pleased to know these stats about myself. Also, what a luckbox

You are in luck that @OctopiPoker tracks luck of all poker players at streamed Final Tables. We track your all-ins: raw equity, ICM value and outcomes (amongst other things). After 46 all-ins, you are running $1.3M above EV. Congrats!

@AllenKessler @DBPoker1 Love it!

Another satisfied customer! Mike Setera bought @DylanLinde Mastering mixed game book from @DBPoker1 before venturing into this Horse championship in Hammond.

@TheBradOwen There’s zero shot I could do what you do and bring the joy of the game to other players in the way you do. Tournament variance is wilder than most people imagine, especially now in live poker where you either play small fields vs the best or have to beat 1000s for a title.

I just need to vent a little bit otherwise I feel like I'm going to completely lose what I like about myself... I'm up about a million lifetime in poker, but it's not that much over the course of 20+ years. I'm down $400k from the high point before the 2024 WSOP started. I've only had one complete losing year (last year), but I'm down $100k this year already and I feel like I'm losing my identity and a failure if I don't turn things around soon, especially if I'm not as open about it as I can be about the tough times. I've done pretty much everything in poker except win a major title so I've torched money in mixed games trying to get better and learn/play with the best in small field large buy-in events. This is where the overwhelming majority of the $400k downswing has come from, and it's really not that many buy-ins when I'm playing high stakes events, but I need to talk about it somewhere since there are no vlogs of these sessions. I can always just quit and go back to cash where wins are consistent and easier, but it's enjoyable for me to push myself and I don't want to give up just yet even though it would certainly be better for my mental well-being. I put an insane amount of pressure on myself to try to be the best dad, significant other, poker player, content creator, ambassador, etc. that I can be. It's tough to ever escape or take a break because I fear that if I turn off the machine, even for a short time, I might not be able to turn it on again. There aren't a ton of people who can relate to what I have going on - maybe just 2 or 3 partially and 1 of them WPT made what I consider to be a massive mistake by parting ways with, which leads to me feeling very isolated and just generally not having nearly as much fun as I used to in the poker world. I don't know how much time I have left in this space before I get too burnt out. Time with my family is what makes me the most happy and I don't get to be with them or be there for them quite as much as I would like. My health is deteriorating as well and I just can't keep up at the pace I've been at the last several years even though there are plenty of reasons to keep churning out videos as frequently as I can. I'm incredibly fortunate to be in the situation I'm in. I love being on the WPT team - I don't agree with all of the decisions, but typically they do a lot of cool things for poker and I'm in the position to be able to lose $10ks and not have it affect my life at all. I'm living the dream and my 15 year old self wouldn't believe that I actually made it in the poker industry - I'm on the same f***ing team as Ivey!! Most days I'm super grateful and appreciative. Some days I just want to burn everything I've built down because I feel like a fraud and don't feel like I deserve any of it. None of what I do is that hard or that important and if I started making vlogs in the current climate, I'd likely get lost in the shuffle and wouldn't be nearly as successful. I don't like where some things are headed. I hate YouTube shorts. I hate AI voiceovers. I hate that a lot of people are promoting the game in a way that I don't think is healthy for younger people to see because the approach is that they're content creators first trying to do the most exciting thing and not the most responsible thing. I'm contributing to that now, and it's easy for me to justify blasting off in certain spots to hopefully make an interesting video and achieve certain goals I had when I was a first fell in love with poker in the early 2000s (like winning a bracelet or WPT), but I guess this tweet is my attempt to try to make things slightly better. It actually hurts me to see top level players like Jeremy Ausmus, Seth Davies, and even Chidwick to some extent, make poker content on YouTube/Twitter/Instagram. Nearly all of the poker content, especially from these guys is objectively good for poker, but vlogs used to be something that most top guys shit all over and now we're seeing them with stands and cameras at the table because the major poker companies don't give the best players ambassador roles anymore. I 100% benefit from it - I'm like win the lottery and get struck by lightning on the same day lucky. I just miss how things were back in the heyday and I'd like to see more opportunities for the guys I look up to in the industry - the guys who have actually accomplished a lot on the felt. Also, I hate that Kalshi sponsors the Lodge livestream and I think some gum company does as well that just has nothing to do with poker. It feels weird and even there we've strayed from what made that place special, but I'm optimistic we're going to right the ship. I wish I was there more to help make that happen. One of the few things I'm proud of myself for recently is turning down the opportunity to promote the side gambling games that Gold offers, which would've made me a lot more money. If I didn't do that I would've felt like I've sold out completely. I have no issues promoting poker because I'm an example of someone who's been successful at it, whereas if people are betting/gambling in things they have no shot at winning in the long-run - I just can't be a part of it and don't want to promote it. Let's see what else... Andrew Neeme should be in the poker hall of fame for revolutionizing poker in two massive ways - meet up games and vlogging, which has inspired more poker players than almost everything in the last few decades. WSOP needs to move its Bahamas event to January and stop giving out so many online bracelets. I don't know how you guys don't dislike shameless promotions more. I know that I should get a therapist and I will likely regret tweeting this 🔥🔥🔥

@lormson @JonAguiar @hohnjolley @aredubbz @BigHuni @BuffaloHanks @Donnie_Peters Definitely can on polymarket. Assume so on kalshi too

@jeffplatt @WSOP Strange departure from the trend of having high stakes NL tournies every week. Rather have more events than multiple starting flight high stakes ones. Some structure changes seem good. Overall greed level on reentries is very… expected.

What're y'all's initial thoughts when it comes to @wsop schedule?

@ArtParmann On the hunt

@DylanLinde Not yet, you offering? 👀

Sending this to anyone who says I spend too much $ at Disneyland.

Any Vegas people have a landscape maintenance person they really like?

I didn’t quit my busboy job till I was well into the 6 figures in poker. One of my first pieces of advice when people ask me how to make it in poker.

@BigHuni @ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp As far as what I’d prefer as a player and token holder… I’d prefer an original model that made the proposed profit sharing sustainable from the jump

Dylan, this is incorrect! The price was solely based on the 4 week rolling rake average. The price didn’t and wasn’t ever going to move based on people selling the token. That was one reason they wanted to try this model in the first place. The issue is the early investors and ambassadors that would sell weekly draining the treasury. Phenom already gives 50% of the weekly rake to the players in revenue share. So the other 50% needs to be used to cover expenses for the site and to help improve the site. But instead most of it was going to buying the tokens in the treasury. As a player and token holder who basically owns a piece of the company, would you prefer the money go to buying up tokens or improving the site to be one of the best sites around to play on? It was clear this model wasn’t sustainable, but finding the solution is difficult.

Regarding @PhenomPokerApp, here's what I can gather about the entire situation: Everyone holds their own funds, so the good news is that nobody's player roll is at risk. The issue is that people weren't able to cash out their promised rakeback. Now it's open for cashout but they admit that a "run on the bank" will cause them not to be able to cover it all, which obviously isn't good. I will say that the people who have messaged me about Phenom really enjoy the site and the software, and are very sad to see what has become of it. If the site wants to survive, I recommend they drop this "token" and "player ownership" nonsense, and just pay straight-up rakeback like all other sites do. People were on Phenom because they enjoyed the software and the selection of games, not because of this gimmicky token BS. They were growing and slowly picking up momentum, so this is a stupid reason for the entire thing to crash and burn. It does not make sense to me why the site lacks the liquidity to pay full rakeback. All they had to do was hold back whatever % of the collected rake for this purpose, and then pay out. Every time I ask what happened, I get an overly complicated word salad trying to explain, so I've given up trying to figure out what really occurred. The rakeback situation isn't trivial, as players were encouraged to hoard their tokens, and many accumulated a good deal of them, believing they could be cashed out at any point. So it sounds like a lot of money is collectively owed, even though non-rakeback player balances are safe due to the site's hold-your-own-funds model. I hope Phenom reconsiders its model, preserves what's good about it, and makes everything right for its players. FYI I have no interest in seeing Phenom fail. I have no beef with the owner or its pros, nor am I associated with any competing site. I just want to see everyone get the rakeback payments promised to them.

@BigHuni @ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp It isn’t great for the current player pool, but it’s a good way forward imo.

@BigHuni @ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp Sure, I think the move is a positive step to filling in the hole. I was just trying to say what was before was broken unless it experienced parabolic growth. The new model is a good way to save it. The company needs a treasury to spend if it wants to grow

@ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp Sure, it’s a reasonable plan at this stage.

@DylanLinde @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp So the lesson is: Don’t give liquidity to angel investor/ambassadors while also being the only buyer of said liquidity at a formulaic price point. So this plan should be the best shot at fixing it, no?

@ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp The price should just flex downward as people sell.

@ArtParmann @ToddWitteles @PhenomPokerApp Art, a true market price never rings unredeemable. The rakeback was paid out at the the market price at the time when the given period was over. Folks bought phnm with their rakeback at the given price in a period. There shouldn’t ever be no liquidity to buy it back

@tsarrast Curious what happens to rake share for tokens locked (or unlocked) in LPs, what’s going on there?

Phenom is implementing some changes. I want everyone to know that this was discussed quite a bit internally before the announcement. This post is not about the details of those changes. You can get that from Phenom’s Twitter account or elsewhere. This is about my experience and perspective as someone involved on the inside. When Matt, the CEO, called me to discuss it, he had a real problem to solve. The current treasury redemption model has people redeeming tokens every week, which pulls money out of the company that could otherwise be used to grow the site. He presented a few ideas. One was tying rewards to staking, with increased rakeback for those who stake. The other was moving from a treasury redemption model to a free market token price model. My gut reaction was mixed. I liked the staking and rewards changes. I didn’t like the token model change. It felt like we were going back on the idea that the Phenom token was a crypto token done right. And honestly, I’d guess many of you are having the same initial reaction I did. That reaction kicked off nearly a two hour call with Matt. Longer than I wanted, especially since I had an early flight the next morning. But this was something I felt I needed to fully understand. Over the course of that call, I changed my mind. And in the days that followed, the more I thought about it, and the more I talked with others involved in Phenom like Huck and Alec, it became clear to me that the most important change here was not the staking/rewards but was moving from a treasury exchange model to a free market token model. The company currently has a problem with variable, random token redemptions coming out of the 50 percent of rake allocated to the treasury. Matt even recently had to sell tokens below market value to raise treasury funds. I know because I bought some. That alone highlights the issue. But to me, the bigger problem is that the treasury redemption model is fundamentally illiquid. Many people have not been able to redeem as many tokens as they want week to week, because the only buyer is the treasury, and the treasury can only allocate a limited portion of weekly rake to redemptions. Anyone who thinks about basic free market economics for more than a minute can see that having a single buyer with capped funds is not an efficient or healthy system. While having a fixed token price tied to the last four weeks of rake sounds nice, I don’t think that benefit is worth draining the company of reliable weekly income while also creating severe illiquidity. In my view, this problem only gets worse over time and would eventually create reputational issues for Phenom. The only real solution is moving to a free market token model on an exchange. Importantly, how the token is bought or sold is not what gives it value. The Phenom token is not valuable because it can be redeemed from the treasury. It is valuable because supply is capped and staking allows participation in 50 percent of the rake the company collects. The token represents ownership in the revenue stream of the business. That has not changed. As long as the site operates, poker is played, and rake is collected, the token has value. And token holders should want treasury funds to be used to grow the site, so more rake is generated and distributed, rather than having the treasury act as the sole buyer of tokens. I do realize this change could cause volatility early on. It may unlock sellers. But it also unlocks buyers. Now anyone can buy Phenom tokens at any time. Who might want to do that? Crypto investors and traders who look for projects with real revenue and alignment. All wallets are visible on-chain. I plan on locking all my tokens. Matt is doing the same, as are all the other people involved with the project I’ve spoken to at this point. I’m excited about the longer lockups and the ability to earn even more revenue than before. Either the site succeeds or it doesn’t. That was always true. And that outcome has nothing to do with whether tokens are redeemed through a treasury or sold on the market. One of the prime reasons I got involved with Phenom in the first place is alignment. The site is aligned with the players. This change is not bad for players. Despite my initial knee jerk reaction that it was, I now believe it is necessary for the long term health of the project. The Phenom token is different because it is actually necessary. It is the mechanism for distributing rakeback. It is ownership in the revenue the company produces. Moving from a fixed-price sole-redeemer system to a free market system should improve liquidity and overall token health. There is a good chance that eventually the market prices the token higher than the current treasury formula, which is effectively about ten times annual revenue. Early stage growth companies often trade well above that. That is not why this change is happening though. It is happening because it solves real liquidity problems created by a system that was originally designed due to concerns about the token being a security. With those concerns gone, there is no reason to continue handicapping the growth of the site. There is also a decentralization issue. One of Phenom’s long term goals is for token ownership to come with increasing voting rights as the site matures. That requires broader token ownership. A system where the treasury is the primary buyer and tokens flow back to the company does not promote decentralization. A free market does. Wrap up: Change is uncomfortable, especially when it touches something people care about. My job here is not to sell anyone on short term price action. I don't know how that will look. It’s to be honest about what happened. I believe these changes give Phenom the best chance to succeed long term. After being deeply involved in these discussions, I believe this change strengthens the project, aligns incentives better, and gives Phenom a real shot at becoming what it set out to be.

@tjreidpoker Sounds like the perfect face to give the money to. All in.

@DylanLinde Well said. His face was pleasant but a little squirrely, appropriate for the jungle.

500/1K/1K, 100 big blinds deep, early in a $10K tourney. Folds to you in SB, and you make it 4K with 77. BB, very strong pro, makes it 24K. What do you do?