Beyond the $39 Million: What Poker Players Really Asked Sam Greenwood

When a guy like Sam Greenwood—a name synonymous with Super High Roller final tables and nearly $40 million in lifetime cashes—says “Ask Me Anything,” you sit up and pay attention. He’s a veteran of the game, a guy who was battling online as “IfHeDiesHeDies” on Full Tilt back when online poker felt like the Wild West. Now he’s a regular on the Triton circuit and writes a Substack called “Punt of the Day,” where he, get this, breaks down his own mistakes. It’s an insane level of transparency.

So when he opened the floor for a Q&A, it was a perfect storm. You had the opportunity to ask one of the world's best literally anything. And boy, did people deliver. The questions that rolled in painted a perfect, unfiltered picture of what’s really rattling around in the minds of poker players today.

The Elephant in the Room: Let's Talk About the Money

Before anyone even got to the nitty-gritty strategy, the community went straight for the jugular. The big, shiny $39 million number? Yeah, nobody was buying it at face value. And can you blame them?

Comment after comment hammered on the same point:

“The amount won is completely pointless without the amount spent on buy ins.”

Another person put it more bluntly:

“If your hendon says you have made 39 mil in tournaments, how much do you think you are down overall?”

It’s a cynical take, for sure, but it’s also the most real question in poker. We see these massive scores on TV, but anyone who’s been in the game for more than a week knows that's not the whole story. There are buy-ins, re-entries, staking deals, and swaps. That $1 million prize might have cost $1.2 million in bullets to fire. This immediate and widespread skepticism wasn't just trolling; it was a reflection of a seasoned, educated community that understands the brutal variance and economics of tournament poker. They weren’t trying to be rude; they were just cutting through the noise to get to the one stat that truly matters: profit.

GTO, Solvers, and the Agony of Moving Up

Once the financial audit was out of the way, the strategy hounds came out to play. The questions here were a fascinating look into the modern poker mind, which seems to be in a constant battle between computer-like perfection and human intuition.

One person asked a beautifully technical question about how to play medium-strength hands out of position, balancing check-calls against check-raises to avoid getting run over. This is the kind of stuff that keeps grinders up at night. The conversation immediately spiraled into talk of range advantage, nut advantage, and merging ranges—all concepts born from the era of GTO solvers.

Another player posed a question that anyone who’s tried to climb the ladder can feel in their bones:

“I’m a low to mid stakes MTT grinder. I crush those, but anytime I buyin to the bigger buyins Im the one who gets crushed. What specific adjustment do I need to make?”

Oof. That one hits hard. It speaks to the massive skill gap that exists between a $50 tournament and a $5k. It’s not just about playing your cards; it’s about navigating a field of crushers who think about the game on a completely different level. How much of their thought process is just trying to play like a machine, and how much is about specific reads on their opponents? It's the central question of high-stakes poker in 2025.

Remembering the “Good Ole Days”

Amidst all the talk of solvers and dollars, a wave of nostalgia washed over the conversation. One user saw Sam mention he did his first AMA on the Two Plus Two forums back in 2007, in a format called “The Well,” and it was like opening a time capsule.

He reminisced about the old days of the forums, a time of legendary photoshop threads and genuinely hilarious, helpful strategy discussions.

“Poker players (back then) were some of the funniest guys on the internet,” he wrote, lamenting that all that history is just… gone.

It was a poignant moment. It reminded everyone that before poker became a science to be solved, it was a culture. It was a community full of characters, inside jokes, and a kind of raw creativity that feels harder to find these days.

Sam himself is a bridge to that era. Seeing his old screen name, “IfHeDiesHeDies,” brought back memories for the old-school players, connecting the polished professional of today with the online warrior he once was.

Poker Brain and Other Human Concerns

Of course, it wouldn't be a true community Q&A without the weird, wonderful, and deeply human questions. Someone asked, with what felt like genuine concern:

“Did you lose emotions in life due to poker?”

That’s a heavy one. It speaks to the mental toll of a game built on emotional control, stoicism, and weathering brutal swings without flinching. What does that do to a person long-term?

And then, you had the comedy. You just have to love the beautiful chaos of the internet. My personal favorite:

“Do you ever play poker drunk drunk like 8 beers and play at lowest stakes 1/3? Do you ever short buy like $60 then go all in preflop no look then laugh maniacly?”

The user followed up with, “Those are my two biggest leak how can I fix them,” and someone replied perfectly:

“You’re beautiful just the way you are son. Never change for anyone.”

It was a perfect encapsulation of the poker community's spirit. We can spend hours debating 4-bet bluffing ranges and ICM pressure, but we also just want to know if the legends sometimes go full degen, just for the fun of it.

What It All Means

Looking back at the entire exchange, it's clear this was more than just a simple Q&A. It was a core sample of the poker world's current state of mind. It’s a world obsessed with the truth behind the money, a world grappling with the rise of the machines (solvers), a world that's a little bit wistful for its wilder past, and a world that, underneath it all, is still deeply human.

We want to know how to beat the best, but we also want to know if the best are still like us. Do they feel the pain of a punt? Do they get bored? Do they ever just want to laugh maniacally while shoving blind? The answer, you have to suspect, is yes. And in an age of calculated perfection, that’s a pretty comforting thought.