[23467]

What I find ironic reading this thread is the fact this topic was posted in the 'Televised poker' section. That fact alone hints that we would not hear names like ZeeJustin or Imperium as the most popular answers [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

So, I guess the answer should be somebody whose face we see on TV often enough. The problem is what we see on TV is mostly the footage of the final tables where most players don't have many big blinds and the explanation of what is going on by the announcers is generally poor / mediocre.

To decide who is best NL tournament player we need to agree what is the decision based on.

If it is a number of cashes in WSOP events, then, it could be Helmuth and Brenes.

If it is the number of WSOP bracelets, then, it would be Helmuth, Chan and Doyle, with inclusion of ppl like Seidel and TJ.

If it is the number of bracelets won in the 21st century, then, we can put Ivey and Cunningham on the list etc.

If we are talking about total money won, then, well, we got Negreanu, Mortensen and Mr I-eat-blueberries on TV.

If we need to decide the answer based on players skills, then it gets really vague.

In summary, the question does not make much sense, I think.

As for PH, I think he is really good at self-promoting. He makes sure everybody knows about his 11 bracelets and also emphasizes how important it is. That is why so many people have such a high opinion about him.