Which professional's game do you respect the most?

McFly · 03-24-2006, 08:47 PM

I'm talking tv guy, not online specialist. For me, Ted Forrest is the consumate professional. I really respect the way he plays and I try to emulate him. He can read people like there's no tomorrow. He's agressive when he needs to be and adjusts his play according to his reads of the table. I enjoy watching him play.

Who do you like to watch?

bostonceltics13 · 03-24-2006, 09:29 PM

It's hard to argue against a Ted Forrest. I like pieces of everyone. Robert Viconi has the math and probability, Annie Duck has the innocent face and Daniel Nagranu has a bit of talent in a variety of games and the heart. My pick would be Phil Ivey. Great poker face, pulls the trigger with anything and reads players pretty well. He rarely gets on tilt producing many cashes but for some reason I haven't figured out yet, not many titles. Great question McFly.

moses millsap · 03-24-2006, 10:11 PM

Best player I've played against is Ivey (online). A good professional player, whom I'm not sure what happened to him, is Asher Derai. He was typically one of the best at the tables whenever I played him live (tournies that is). Live cash games, a real solid shorthanded player is Huck Seed, but his style only works against weak passive players, but luckily, the other two players at the table that day were exactly that.

QuickLearner · 03-24-2006, 10:34 PM

I probably respect Chris Ferguson's game the most because I am a "math first" player and so is he. Although I have to admit that I am pretty sick of the splitting fruit with a thrown card routine. I bet he's sorry that he ever told anyone he could do that.

He's not my favorite to watch, though. I like to watch the colorful players, so in no particular order here are my favorites:

Phil Helmuth, Jr. Fabulous talent with opportunities to bet the over/under on how soon he'll melt down.
Mike Matusow. One of the best tourney players. Period. He used to be good for a mental episode every time he played, but he seems more under coltrol these days. Off the dope, probably.
Jennifer Harmon. As cute as a button and as dangerous as a basket of cobras.
Johnny Chan. Johnny bleepin' Chan. Need I say more?
Gus Hansen. I make money off guys who think they are Gus Hansen. I wish he was on TV every day.
Howard Lederer. He may not seem "colorful" to you, but he's been one of my favorites ever since he practically sawed Daniel Negreanu in half in print on RGP (because DN had badly insulted his sister).
Barry Greenstein. He may look like Nosferatu, but he's a wizard. And the charity deal doesn't hurt his reputation.
Doyle Brunson. I watch him for the same reason I watch Gary Player and Arnold Palmer: respect. He got his 10th bracelet last year fer crissakes! I know, So did Chan.
Phil Ivey. Bostonceltics covered it.
Liz Lieu. She can play some, too.

moses millsap · 03-24-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuickLearner

Phil Helmuth, Jr. Fabulous talent with opportunities to bet the over/under on how soon he'll melt down.

Phil is one of the worst live cash game players I've ever seen. You should see the pro's salivating when they found out he was on his way to Lucky Chances or Bay 101 back a couple years ago. And the one table I played with him in a Omaha8 tourney, he was ridiculously bad.

And that is why he comes to the big tournies late, because he can't play a deep stack. He needs to play on shallow money and work off of his image to be real successful, imho.

McFly · 03-24-2006, 11:00 PM

Celtics - overall, there is no arguing that Ivey is among the best in the world today. Can't go wrong there.

QuickLearner · 03-25-2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OWNED

Phil is one of the worst live cash game players I've ever seen.

I've heard that. I've never played with any of these guys, save the one time that John D'Agostino sat in the LL NL game I was playing at Fulltilt. He sucked out on me; QQ vs. my KK and rivered a Q. Of course, he stacked me. Then he typed into the chat box, "I wouldn't have called if I was playing higher stakes." He's young, so I give him credit for not knowing what an insulting comment that was.

Back to the subject. I meant to say that I don't have any experience with these people; I was only talking about the OP's original line: TV poker. There's very little cash poker on TV except for that GSN thing, it's all tourneys. And I'm sure you'd agree that Helmuth is one of the most talented, and colorful, tourney players in the world.

moses millsap · 03-25-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuickLearner

And I'm sure you'd agree that Helmuth is one of the most talented, and colorful, tourney players in the world.

He is colorful and talented, but I think he's overrated. I respect players who can play on a deep stack, beause that's where the class separates. Any donkey can do well on shallow money tournies, because of the much larger luck factor.

QuickLearner · 03-25-2006, 10:27 AM

Let's list all the donkeys who have multiple WSOP bracelets. We don't have to limit it to players who have more that 8, how about more than 1. I'll start:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sorry, I can't think of any. Your turn.

And, even though he only has 1, before you drop the "Chris Moneymaker is a donkey" bomb, let me say one thing. God bless Chris Moneymaker.

Edit: By the way, tell me what you mean by shallow money tournaments. I honestly don't know what the phrase means.

moses millsap · 03-25-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuickLearner

Let's list all the donkeys who have multiple WSOP bracelets. We don't have to limit it to players who have more that 8, how about more than 1. I'll start:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sorry, I can't think of any. Your turn.

And, even though he only has 1, before you drop the "Chris Moneymaker is a donkey" bomb, let me say one thing. God bless Chris Moneymaker.

Look when Hellmuth won those bracelets. He was playing on short fields mostly. I'm not doubting his talent, he's a good player, but he's overrated and not nearly as great as some others out there who don't get the recognition, because they are boring and not controversial.

I could not only list 8, but probably 80 players I'd rather back than Hellmuth on a consistent basis.

moses millsap · 03-25-2006, 10:34 AM

Deep money play means you are playing with small blinds (25/50 blinds, lets say) and a deep stack (10k or 20k in chips). Shallow money means the relationship between the blinds are stacks are much closer, i.e. 200/400 blinds and avg stacks are 4k. You are allowed much more creativity with deep stack play. Hellmuth thrives on shallow money play (bubble money play), because he's been around and understands these concepts and he understands the amateurs are afraid to go bust when they should be theoretically pushing hands they are folding because they only have 5-7x the BB left in their stack. Hellmuth is smart, he knows his weaknesses and strengths, that's probably his best quality. If he started playing the big events on time, he know he would get frustrated and go on tilt with the early play, because the variance to make moves is much larger and much harder for a player like him to get a grasp, because he doesn't like to mix it up early.

QuickLearner · 03-25-2006, 01:30 PM

I see. You're saying that he has a reputation for not showing up to play the early levels when the blinds are low? I didn't know that.

That strikes me as an absurd concept. I'm having trouble believing that he would follow it. So you've actually seen him do it a lot?

moses millsap · 03-25-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuickLearner

I see. You're saying that he has a reputation for not showing up to play the early levels when the blinds are low? I didn't know that.

That strikes me as an absurd concept. I'm having trouble believing that he would follow it. So you've actually seen him do it a lot?

I'd say 95% minimum (If not every time) of the time in a major tourney, Phil shows up 2 or 3 rounds late (2 to 3 hours late). Not really an absurd concept, because he can come back with 9.2k in chips or so when the money is more shallow and prey on the weak players.

bostonceltics13 · 03-25-2006, 01:58 PM

Hellmuth is overrated. He is a good poker player but a great business man. His reputation sells his book. His reputation from selling books helps him intimidate at the table. There are many that outplay Hellmuth on a regular basis.

As far as Hellmuth not being successful in cash games. They are truely two different disciplines. A cash player specialist would not know how to manage chips in a tournament and tournament players will have a hard time making the transition to cash games.

Hellmuth showing up late is also a great strategy for a player like him. Do you have any idea how hard it is to put an true amateur on a hand? Nearly impossible. This saves Hellmuth that bad beat or bad call scenario. Showing up fashionably late may cost him a few cheap blinds like you said, but it allows those true amateurs a chance to donate their chips to players he can read.

moses millsap · 03-25-2006, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bostonceltics13

As far as Hellmuth not being successful in cash games. They are truely two different disciplines. A cash player specialist would not know how to manage chips in a tournament and tournament players will have a hard time making the transition to cash games.

Good points on all, but disagree with you here. A cash game specialist can thrive in a tourney if playing on deep money. A tournament specialist will always get killed in cash games. (I think cash game players have a much easier time making the transition to tourney play, because for the most part, understanding the keys to tournament play is a lot easier to comprehend than understanding how to attack and continually succeed in a cash game environment)

QuickLearner · 03-25-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OWNED

I'd say 95% minimum (If not every time) of the time in a major tourney, Phil shows up 2 or 3 rounds late (2 to 3 hours late). Not really an absurd concept, because he can come back with 9.2k in chips or so when the money is more shallow and prey on the weak players.

I understand what he may be thinking, but I still think it's absurd for two reasons. First, if he sat down on time he'd have 2-3 hours to observe his opponents and he could just fold everything if he chose to; second, he's giving up the opportunity to flop a monster from the big blind. I might also make an argument that those people splashing around should be giving their chips to me, rather than one of my opponents. I know he should be scared of coinflips, but really...