this will be my last response in regers to jesus, umm I mean Phil.

If I don't know too much about proffesional poker players, you definetly do not understand placing in one of these. $3.6 million = somewhere around $2 million when the govt is done. if you were to play every event at the WSOP it would cost you $80,000. Let's say our hero over the past 15 years has spent an average of $50,000 just at the WSOP each year. That means his Buy ins alone would cost $750,000. Add to that ALL the other tournaments (where he has had a lot less success monetarily) and you can see my point, if this guy has made legitimate Million in tournaments over his career I'd be surprised. Throw in the travel costs to all these events and such to.

You guys don't take into consideration all the costs of playing these tournaments from buy ins to expenses and not to mention the leaks they have. If you wanted to play a full year on the tournament trail you would need close to $500,000 to get to and play all the events.

I'm not saying Phil's tournament success is to be questioned, I'm saying tournament Success does not always equate to monetary success.

Why do I see a host of players considered to be the best, trying to borrow money or scrounge up buy ins playing 10/20 and lower (i won't name the ones I have seen doing this, you'll just have to take my word for it).

The best tournament player right now is Negrenau, he plays very few tournaments and gets the most return on his investment. Daniel rarely plays any tournament but the Main Events except at the WSOP this year.

I've been to 6 WPT events, and when the big names get into town it's ugly. They pester each other in the poker room "come on stake me, you know I can beat that 300/600 game over there" and when all else fails play in a 2/4 or 3/6 game hoping to win a couple hundred so they can enter a satellite. It's actually a pretty disturbing site.

And how much did he spend to make the $3.6 million.

And BTW, Phils house was paid for by his backing on John Bonnetti according to Play Poker Like the Pros. Phil is good with his money and has a good business sense, this alone gives him an advantage on my of his peers.

Phil is a good player, but how do you get he makes tons of money online? Where? He won't play tournaments on UB, and generally loses is ass that the big NL games, the only place I have seen him win is 2-7 triple draw.

You should look up Barry Greenstein's assessment of him.

http://www.barrygreenstein.com/phellmuth.htm

Good quotes: "When Phil has his banter and his A-game working, he not only can control the table, but he can mesmerize the entire room."

"Phil has assured me that he is a much better player than I give him credit for. He feels he has enough technical skill to win at higher limits, but when he has tried in the past, he often gotten derailed by his lack of self-control."


Sklansky's Ten Smartest Players
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...5&o=14&fpart=1

well i'm sorry but barry greenstein is just wrong. yes, phil is a bad cash game player. no one is saying that he's not a bad cash game player. however every aspect of his game does lead to him being a better tournament player. may it be his annoying personality to get weaker players confused or just his ability to make monster lays, he is a great tournament player. plus, as far as money goes, i don't know if he's made or lost money, i think he's made playing poker, but i don't know. however i know that stu unger was a long time losing player but does that not make him a bad poker player? no. bad money manager, maybe. bad poker player, absolutely not

That makes no sense.

Plus I am not sure it is true, i think he lost his money elsewhere, and he was reportedly a great tournament player.

You really should re-think your hero worship of hellmuth, I do think he is a great player, but not as great as he wants everyone to think.

Didn't Stu Ungar lose his money to drugs?

well for example the day after he won one of his main events, he lost 500 grand at razz the next day

i guess i dont know where to start off... Im not the one who started this post(it was a friend at my house on my computer)

So i guess here are my views on... everything going on here...

JJ.- the most overrated hand in poker...and AQ

I just dont understand what you like about the hand?

Calling an all in versus a tight player- a coinflip... i mean 54 46 not to offend you people who insist that JJ is a HUGE 4-8% favorite over AK(s).

Show me a pro that says oh jeez i have JJ i guess ill call the all in and hope to god im 54% favorite to win. Seriously if they dont have 22-JJ which i know the player would not reraise all in with you ARE HOPING you are even money. If you are better than the field its an easy fold. If you are worse than the field then call and hope to god your Jacks are even money and then hope to god you dont see an Ace or King on the five cards on the board.

I was at the game... He had 14 chips in and had well over 70 chips left( less than 15% of your stack) You are not forced to call here because
A) You dont have enough chips in the pot forcing you to call
B) You are AT BEST 56% favorite to win
C) Pot odds play a MUCH bigger role in cash games than tournaments.

In cash games you are looking at the long term winning play that will win you the most money in the long term. This is not how tournaments are played at all.
FOR EXAMPLE
You have in a cash game and decide to call and see a flop.

The board is . You make a bet and then three people go all in in front of you. What do you do??? CALL BECAUSE OF POT ODDS( assuming you are playing with money you can afford to lose and within your 'roll)

now lets put this into a tournament play...
the answer becomes a lot harder to decide because you either win all the chips or get busted out of the tournament. You cant just say...well i had the pot odds and get back in the tournament if you lose unlike a cash game.

i believe pot odds are overrated... for weak players who just say well i had the pot odds.. i had to call

OK... ONTO HELLMUTH...

one of the best nlhe tournament players ever: yes!
does he really care about the money??? of course but he much rather have the bracelet.

So it comes down to how do you define greatness???
Money??? I doubt it... probably to online players but who really gives a SHEEET because honestly i doubt anyone cares what bonchkid made at the penny tables last week.

Oh my god... Doyle lost a shit load in cash games in the past couple years... But everyone likes the old teddy bear brunson.

"Hellmuth is a good money manager" someone said earlier...
then im sure he wasnt playing high enough stakes that really affected his life.

Hellmuth is a great tournament player!!! end of story

The best Poker player ever??? this easily goes to stu ungar
EASILY... EASILYYY... WITHOUT A DOUBT IN MY MIND... Just look at this hand and tell me he isnt
Back in 1992 at the World Series of Poker (WSOP), World Champions Mansour Matloubi and Stuey Ungar faced off in a series of $50,000 buy-in heads-up freeze outs. Mansour tells me he was at the top of his game at this point in his poker career, having just won the WSOP in 1990. The game they were playing that day was no-limit Hold'em, and the blinds were $200-$400 when the following hand came up. Stuey opened for $1600 in the small blind, and Mansour called with 4-5 off suit. After a flop of 3-3-7 rainbow (no suits), Stuey bet $6,000--he started the hand with $60,000 to Mansour's $40,000--and Mansour called the $6,000 bet. On fourth-street a K came off and both players checked. On the river a Q came off to make a board of 3-3-7-K-Q, and Mansour, smelling weakness in Stuey, bet his last $32,000 or so. Stuey looked "right through" Mansour, and within ten seconds he said, "You have 4-5 or 5-6, I'm gonna call you with this." Stuey then flipped up 10-9, and called the $32,000 bet with merely ten-high! Wow, what an unbelievable call! Stuey can't even beat a jack-high-bluff with his hand, never mind any pair. In fact, Stuey could only beat 4-5, 4-6 or 5-6 in this scenario.

NOW THATS THE BEST POKER PLAYER THAT EVER LIVED

I have played the highest NL games on pokerstars 5/10NL... won a lot lost a lot... does anyone care??? NO

What would make me a better poker player??? Winning $100,000 online or beating out 45 proffesionals in a 1K buy in and taking home $17,000?

EVERYONE(but me and hellmuth) likes the call...WHY???

BECAUSE HE HAPPENED TO BE IN AGAINST AK AND WON THE HAND...

He was JUST AS LIKELY to be up against QQ KK and AA and im sure none of you would have liked the call then

I must be a bad player since i would call you in this spot everytime under all of the above circumstances.

But what do i know, I play for money not jewelry.

how many chips YOU have in the pot is irrelevant, the pot is offering 123 on your 80 call this is relevant.

And in your 14 outer above you are the underdog thats a whole different scenario.

I could tell you right away he does not have AA or KK in your original post, he wouldn't have moved all in. you don't try to take down a 43 chip pot with AA or KK heads up, you try to bust the player.