Best tournament player of all time

[EarlLee]

Well, to give it a baseball analogy. . . .Doyle Brunson is Babe Ruth. Stu Unger is Mickey Mantle. Phil Ivey is Alex Rodriguez. Jeff Madsen is Albert Pujols. We don't know yet where Ivey and Madsen are going to end up. Unger had more natural talent than Brunson, but pissed it away because of lifestyle issues, just like Mantle did vis-a-vis Ruth. Phil Hellmuth is Dizzy Dean. Moneymaker is Mark Fidrych and Fosilman is Denny McClain.

[MrFizzbin]

** Warning, Spelling and grammer errors ahead, I'm tired and to lazy to proof read this. ***

El D I respect you as a poster but I strongly disagree with your point, 1 year does not a legend make... Look at other sports there are plenty of 1 year dominant players who disappear in year 2 or 3. Poker is a long hard grind, I'm not sure 2 wins and 3rd in prelims events makes a legend (yet)... Excluding Men the Master, Scotty Ngyen (spelled badly), and Chris Ferguson is just wrong (Joe Hatcham is in your poll but none of those 3 ? VAAAAT ?!? *yikes*). Your man has a great chapter 1, no doubt but lets see how chapters 2 and 3 are....

There are plenty of Legendary accomplishemts in sports because of the stage they accomplish it on, but that doesnt make the one accomplishing it legendary. Example the Washington Redskins Running back that ran for 248 yards in the super bowl, (a Legendary accomplishment) v. Walter Payton a Legendary Player. Don Larson's no hitter in the World Series of Baseball a legendary accomplishment v Cy Young, Roger Clemens, Bob Gibson legendary Pitchers. Nobody would say that Don Larson is a better pitcher than Young, Clemens or Gibson,but his accomplishment makes him legendary.. So if your point is 2 braclets and a 3rd in first WSOP Legendary accomplishment ? I disagree there have been multiple event winners in the past and there will be multiple event winners in the future...however if he adds a solid (top 50) main event then I can be swayed..(the higher the finish the more likely I sway...)


Thats my 2 cents.... Thanks for posting it though

[MicroBob]

amusing thread.

No ZeeJustin option?


my serious vote would be that I suspect Ivey is the best.
But it's extremely difficult for ANYONE to say based on the limited, edited exposure we have to any of these players (much less the fact that most observers don't know what they're seeing anyway).


At last year's WSOP prelim event that I played ($3k NLHE) Huck Seed mentioned that he believed Phil Ivey could win up to 20 bracelets (I think that was the number, it was really high...might have been higher than 20) if he really wanted to but that would mean playing the smaller events of course.

Tom McEvoy looked at him with raised eye-brows and seemed to doubt that claim.
Huck reiterated that he was quite serious about that.

But, then again, Huck can be kind of dry sometimes and I've been known to have some pretty unsubtle sarcasms fly way over my head.

[TomHimself]

gus hansen obv greatest of all time

[Xellos]

I skimmed the first 50 replies until I got tired of reading replies from gullible retards.

I voted for Madsen, though it was quite tough to make a decision between all of these tournament heavyweights.

[Jourdain]

PH

[JimmyB13]

ZOMG, best thread ever...The answer is obv Madsen. He's still so young, he could win like 50-100 bracelets still.

I wonder if he's related to Michael Madsen, the actor who played the bad guy on ESPN's "Tilt?" Or perhaps he is related to Mark "Mad Dog" Madsen? He went to college at Stanford and played for the Lakers. so they do have the California thing going.

[SEABEAST]

lol 9/10

god people are stupid

[edfurlong]

Your mom's a people.

[bugman68]

Nobody can be considered the best of all time after a month of tournament events. The best of all time should be considered over a period of years not days. Thats like considering some donk the best of all time cash game player because he had the largest win of all time in his first month of playing.