Barry Carter asks if Daniel Colman is the best player in the world right now, and if his anti-poker stance is actually helping to promote the game?

The man who didn’t want any publicity after winning One Drop has, once again, attracted a ton of publicity.

Daniel Colman won the Seminole Hard Rock Poker Open this week for $1,446,710, and in doing so has broken a lot of records.

It means his total live earnings for 2014 is so far $20,980,768. He has just edged out Phil Ivey from third place in the all-time money rankings. This is also his fourth seven-figure+ win in a single year, which is a record.

Thus far he has commanded the headlines for his political views, his refusal to do interviews and his negative view of the game that earned him almost $21 million this year. However, now the attention is starting to move towards the possibility that he may be one of the best players in the world.

More than anything, his success has shown how greatly the Super High Roller events distort the all-time money rankings beyond any level of reliability. In less than six months, most of the big scores Colman has enjoyed have been in events with less than 60 entrants. The toughest fields imaginable, of course, but much easier for variance to play a pivotal short-term role.

However, his most recent victory bucks that trend. He beat 1,499 other players to the title and his latest seven-figure score, proving that he has the talent to navigate huge fields too. This win will put him 5th in the Global Poker Index rankings, which is currently the best determinant we have of ability (Though still by no means perfect).

Good or bad for poker?

Some people think his anti-poker stance is bad for the game, but I think he is actually inadvertently proving very good for the game. His political views and the video of him ‘not reacting’ to winning $15 million have brought a lot of attention from outside of poker. His ability is starting to make him a star whether he likes it or not.

It reminds me of when musicians publicly denounce the record industry or when Marlon Brando refused his Oscar for the Godfather. On the surface it seems like bad news for their industry, but the reality is it boosts their image with the public and gets media attention, so therefore it proves great publicity for the men in suits.

In poker terms, he reminds me of how Phil Ivey was up until about a year ago. Ivey never publicly decried poker, but he also stayed out of the spotlight and almost never did interviews (Unless he was playing on TV). He wasn’t a rebel, but being aloof actually made him much more of an enigma in the game; the quieter he was, the more marketable he became.

No publicity is bad publicity and as long as Colman keeps winning, and keeps disrupting the way poker players handle the media, I’m sorry to tell him he is going to keep getting himself and poker more and more attention.

Is Colman the best tournament player in the world right now? Do you think he is good or bad for the game? Let us know in the comments box.