Regarding Hellmuth (and others like him)

[Aleo]

This post is not for people who know anything about poker. So if you find yourself reading this and saying "yeah, so?" then I'm probably not addressing this to you.

This post is about some people jumping on the Hellmuth bandwagon as though he is the greatest player the world has ever known, and others arguing against this as though the mere thought is an affront to humanity.

The thing is, this is not an argument that has eternally raged. A few years ago, it decidedly a non-argument. Hellmuth's career had taken a dive and many thought that after a few winless years, he wasn't ever coming back. I remember after his excellent and dedicated commentary on the final table of the 2004 WSOP thinking to myself - now that Hellmuth has lost his tourney game, he should really think about a gig like this full time. He really was great covering that WSOP final table, and it was hard not to come away liking him. Still, pretty much everyone thought his tourney career had fizzled.

The point is, it obviously hadn't and I was stupid for thinking it had. These are poker tournaments we are talking about after all. Sometimes you run bad for a long time. Now, everyone is arguing about Phil's greatness when the real news is just that he still has a killer tourney game. Nobody disputes this now and people forget the opinions they once held.

Now, take this sort of reasoning to many of the other currently slumping or currently hot players out there. We have guys like Cloutier who people love to ridicule, and other guys like Cunningham who are revered as gods. But just a little reflection should reveal that this just isn't accurate. Now I'm not sure Cloutier will ever make another surge but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he won a couple events some year either. He clearly has the history to show he can play. Geez, he won a bracelet just two years ago. Now everyone writes him off as a craps playing fool. Wake up people. He's no different than Hellmuth.

Well, maybe he's a little different. After all, Hellmuth does have the most bracelets, and hot and cold streaks aside, that means something. Not much, but yeah, something. Still, you get my point. The reason Hellmuth seems to cash in everything he plays is because right now that's how things are rolling. Three years ago that's not how things were rolling.

Geez, even Hellmuth deludes himself with this kind of results oriented thinking, saying things like "I'm playing the best poker of my life" whenever he's winning. Get real, he's Hellmuth, he's good enough to cash more than his fair share, but that's all there is to it. He's running really hot right now and it looks amplified.

So I'm not saying BOO Hellmuth, and I'm not saying YAAY Hellmuth either. I'm just saying give the guy his proper due respect now and nothing more, but also give him his proper due respect in three years (or whenever) when he slumps again. Similarly, do the same for guys like TJ or Ivey or Seidel or Forrest or whoever.

The argument about whether Phil is the greatest is stupid. he's really good. So are lots of other guys who we aren't anywhere near having the same argument about. Guys who others probably WERE having this silly argument about ten years ago, and guys who we might again have this silly argument about in another three years.

Now, is this news to anybody? Cause it seems like it must be.