who is the best NL hold'em player?

[McCutter]

Post deleted by McCutter

[McCutter]

Do you bring up The Grinder in order to say "WSOP Results Dont Matter?" I think WSOP results do matter.

[MikeBandy]

[ QUOTE ]
Of all-time? Stu Ungar by far.

http://www.cardplayer.com/magazine/article/12930

[/ QUOTE ]
I would have included Stuey, but I was thinking only of those alive today. No doubt I've left off worthies, anyway.

The main purpose of this post is to thank you for the link. What an amazing article.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are way better NLHE tournament players than hellmuth under the age of 25. At LEAST 10.

[/ QUOTE ]

thread is worthless w/out list of players jimmy

[/ QUOTE ]

Just offhand, there are a LOT more players that have been left out of this list:

Imperium
Zeejustin
Steve Paul-Ambrose
TheNewf/SirWatts
RandAllin
Thayer
JSchnett
mlagoo
Aaron Been
Kush Patel
ActionJeff
Alex Jacob
Carl Olson

These are just a few people who I believe absolutely crush tournaments and have way more understanding of NLHE and tournament strategy than Hellmuth. I left a lot of talent off the list but these are just a few names who are going to come out a lot in the next few years. Note that two of the people on the list are 18.

[/ QUOTE ]

This list is a joke Gobbo, as is your usual assessment of older pros, whom you love to trash, versus the younger talents that you love to glorify.

Of the people on the list I've played with, I agree that most of them are awesome players and understand the game very well, but your assertion that they "have way more understanding" than Hellmuth is so baseless, I'm amazed you have the chutzpah to state it as fact. How many big buyin tournaments have you played in total? You realize that the way you hype up young online players as being necessarily superior to the more seasoned pros is as subjectively biased and absurd as all the people who dote on Hellmuth, right?

There is no list that can accurately assess "talent" in a game whose outcome is primarily determined by luck, and there is no possible way to realistically compare skill until you've played with lots of different players in different scenarios, which you haven't. You have a woody for Aaronbeen, because you know that he's really sharp and capable of crushing NL tournaments, but that doesn't mean Aaron Been is better than Phil Hellmuth!

Fwiw, my list of the best NLHE tourney players right now (based on experiences, my perception, their results, what I think they're doing out there) would include, but not be limited to:

JC Tran,
Nam Le,
Allen Cunningham,
The Grinder,
Danny Wong,
Cory Carroll,
Phil Hellmuth
Alex Jacob,
Tim West,
JC Alvarado,
Jesse Martin,
Jordan Morgan,
David Pham,
Sorel Mizzi,
Haralabos Voulgaris,
...literally dozens of others....

Please note that the list doesn't include anyone I haven't played a fair amount with, or observed a lot, or talked about the game with a lot in the last year, and that I'm also pretty good friends with about half the people there. Lists in poker are stupid.

[gobboboy]

Shane, I made my list from people who I have observed a lot and talked poker with (with the exception of Alex Jacob, I just really like his hair). I think they're amazing players and I do think they have a ton of experience with NLHE and tournaments and in my opinion I think any of them are better at NLHE than Phil.

There are a ton of really good players out there and I think it's ridiculous to say that one person is above and beyond the best player in the game. I think Phil has a ton of things working for him, and he definitely has the best image of anyone in the game right now. I think he gets folds 20% more than he should simply because people are terrified of playing hands with him.

And yeah, I do favor the younger players because I am one of the younger players and I think a lot of things that the older live players do just aren't correct.

[gobboboy]

Also congrats to Aaron who just won a triple crown last night.

[McCutter]

Shaniac is right on: "This list is a joke Gobbo, as is your usual assessment of older pros, whom you love to trash, versus the younger talents (who) you love to glorify."

[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.

[Bonified]

[ QUOTE ]
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 low opinion about him.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, mainly joking, but really, I'd certainly respect him more if he didn't go on about his results all the [censored] time.

[Trebor the Mad Overlord]

My impression from watching PH on TV is that he is better than almost anyone when playing against weaker players, but is not nearly as strong when playing against world-class players (ie: on HSP).

This means that he has a bigger edge in larger tournaments with a lower average skill level, which is why he seems to do better in WSOP events - the huge fields make for a happy hunting ground for his particular skill-set. By the time he becomes a negative-expectation player vs. the remaining field, he's deep, probably in the money, and probably has a big enough stack to survive for quite a while.