duggs
Killing me softly
Silver Level
that growth is definitely less than proportionate to the number of players worldwide (both casually and professionally) so no it doesnt make a difference
that growth is definitely less than proportionate to the number of players worldwide (both casually and professionally) so no it doesnt make a difference
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
^ this. Sure there are five times as many bracelets awarded now compared to years gone by, but it's also much, much harder for any given individual to win one of those bracelets with the increases in player skill and field size.
I'd say that more than offsets the increase in the number of bracelets that are given away, and makes winning one at least as prestigious as it always was.
Ivey winning his ninth bracelet in an event with a low buyin AND a small field size in this day and age was obviously an anomaly - I expect the same event probably would've drawn at least 3-400 entries if it were held in Vegas.
But as followers of the game we're all pretty good at keeping mental track of those anomolies and accounting for them in our own estimation of what a given player's bracelet count really means. How long were we holding "but he's never won in anything other than hold 'em" over Phil Hellmuth's head, for example? How many people probably thought that despite Hellmuth having more bracelets, Doyle was the better player - despite the fact that, I'll state it again, most of Doyle's bracelets came from three-table SnGs, and one of them was from an even where the combined two-person buyin was only $600.
dj11
Legend
Silver Level
I used to not think much about a bracelet, thinking screw that bracelet, give me that money.
Then I should have won a big event and didn't, and won a big prize, but missed the bracelet position and realized the bracelet or trophy or whatever, is important even if it goes in a box in a closet in the basement.
NO DISSIN THE BRACELET!
Then I should have won a big event and didn't, and won a big prize, but missed the bracelet position and realized the bracelet or trophy or whatever, is important even if it goes in a box in a closet in the basement.
NO DISSIN THE BRACELET!
Last edited:
pokerchris
Legend
Silver Level
There will be no live human poker a hundred years from now. You can't tell a guy sitting at the poker table is a human or a robot.
Jackle43
Visionary
Silver Level
haha Iveys name was cleared for all of that. Its proved he had nothing to do with management nor knew anything of it. He was simply a billboard for fulltilt. Classic that people are still blaming the players that did a few phtoshoots and wore their clothing while on tv
A2345Razz
Legend
Silver Level
Uhh, no.
Cash games at the highest level and staying power WILL ALWAYS determine who is the best poker players....
That is because there is exponentially more money to be won in a huge cash game than in tournament poker which is more of a sideshow for the vast majority of players.
With the insane vig+taxes+toking+expenses....tournament poker is becoming less and less a viable alternative for making dough in live poker.
Poker Orifice
FoolsTilt
Platinum Level
You obviously have no clue what I was talking about.. but assumed you did (< classic)
Did you follow any of the procedure following BF? 'Seems' you may have missed some of it & don't know what you're talking about.
dj11
Legend
Silver Level
IIRC, Ivy saw what looked to him to be some serious shenanigans and sort of led an internal insurrection aimed at replacing the FT board. It was probably more public than it should have been and certainly did nothing good for either his own self or FT.
His insurrection failed. The damage was done.
His insurrection failed. The damage was done.
JusSumguy
Chipmonger
Silver Level
S
smidjet
Rock Star
Silver Level
everything i have ever read about that showed that he wasnt involved in any it, he was simply paid for them using his name. far as i can tell he is just a poker freak who is good at it and deserves what he earns
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
I assume he's referring to Ivey's post-Black Friday lawsuit and the effect that may or may not have had on the process of finding a buyer for the site.
Wasn't necessarily the classiest thing to do, but I can't blame the guy for trying to look after his own interests.
duggs
Killing me softly
Silver Level
Ivey would crush him. most pros would even lower tier ones. stu was way ahead of the curve but poker evolves.
BluffyouBAD
Rock Star
Silver Level
Would still be sick to watch though! Two of the guys who are the most fearless when betting tons of money. Two of the guys who are fearless gamblers. Two guys who had amazing hand reading abilities. I still wish I could find a video of Stu's 10 high call!
Lot's of similarities between them based on what I have read/watched on each. I believe it was Mike Sexton who compared them in some documentary I watched.
Jackle43
Visionary
Silver Level
Yeah he compares them in "The Rise and fall of Stu Ungar"
A2345Razz
Legend
Silver Level
Not that I am an authority on Ungar or anything as he was long since dead by 2004 when I got into poker, BUTTTTT
I have probably watched more video on poker nostalgia than 99% of poker fans, and a few things about Stuey have become true in my mind:
1) He was the greatest Gin Rummy player ever to live, and the gap was wide...he basically solved the game with his genius IQ and photographic memory.
It might not be the game of choice these days, but in the early/mid 20th century Gin was played in the N.E. of the US for HUGE sums of money...even my grandfather played big games and once played Ungar for 500 bucks when those were high stakes (something akin to 5k). Ungar annihilated the borscht belt games(think Jews with money summering in upstate NY) and then proceeded to basically break high stakes Gin in Fl....(think rich Jews/Italians who had retired).
It is not only possible but probable that Stuey was more dominant in Gin than anyone has been in any major game in modern history.
2) Stuey was an astonishing NLH donkament player.
I wont go into a long diatribe, but his record speaks for itself and he was 2.5 decades ahead of everyone in the early 1980s when he burst onto the scene in big buy in tourneys. He also won the WC of NL 2/7 often called the purest form of poker around. He also won the WC of Stud...which at that time was easily the most popular game. In fact in the early 80s he almost won both the 5k and 10k stud hi wsop events which would have been like someone winning the 25K and ME of NLH at the WSOP or something.
Stuey, at his peak, was probably the best tournament player for his time there ever has been. Ivey might have something to say about that before he is done, and of course his whole resume is MUCH more impressive, but no one dominated like Stuey did.
3) Stuey was not feared in the biggest cash games by any of the top players.......this is a sad truth no one likes to bring up, but Billy Baxter discussed in his Cardplayer interview.
Stuey had poor emotional control.
Stuey had trouble shifting down in gears.
Stuey just happened to be a piss poor (relative) draw/lowball player when a lot of the biggest Stardust games where in Lowball triple draw. He tried to crack those old Sarge Farris games, but always failed.
Ivey is a more all around poker player and a much better cash game player than Stuey ever dreamt of being. We all should be thankful that we are here to witness the man who is truly the GOAT, PHIL FKN IVEY.
I have probably watched more video on poker nostalgia than 99% of poker fans, and a few things about Stuey have become true in my mind:
1) He was the greatest Gin Rummy player ever to live, and the gap was wide...he basically solved the game with his genius IQ and photographic memory.
It might not be the game of choice these days, but in the early/mid 20th century Gin was played in the N.E. of the US for HUGE sums of money...even my grandfather played big games and once played Ungar for 500 bucks when those were high stakes (something akin to 5k). Ungar annihilated the borscht belt games(think Jews with money summering in upstate NY) and then proceeded to basically break high stakes Gin in Fl....(think rich Jews/Italians who had retired).
It is not only possible but probable that Stuey was more dominant in Gin than anyone has been in any major game in modern history.
2) Stuey was an astonishing NLH donkament player.
I wont go into a long diatribe, but his record speaks for itself and he was 2.5 decades ahead of everyone in the early 1980s when he burst onto the scene in big buy in tourneys. He also won the WC of NL 2/7 often called the purest form of poker around. He also won the WC of Stud...which at that time was easily the most popular game. In fact in the early 80s he almost won both the 5k and 10k stud hi wsop events which would have been like someone winning the 25K and ME of NLH at the WSOP or something.
Stuey, at his peak, was probably the best tournament player for his time there ever has been. Ivey might have something to say about that before he is done, and of course his whole resume is MUCH more impressive, but no one dominated like Stuey did.
3) Stuey was not feared in the biggest cash games by any of the top players.......this is a sad truth no one likes to bring up, but Billy Baxter discussed in his Cardplayer interview.
Stuey had poor emotional control.
Stuey had trouble shifting down in gears.
Stuey just happened to be a piss poor (relative) draw/lowball player when a lot of the biggest Stardust games where in Lowball triple draw. He tried to crack those old Sarge Farris games, but always failed.
Ivey is a more all around poker player and a much better cash game player than Stuey ever dreamt of being. We all should be thankful that we are here to witness the man who is truly the GOAT, PHIL FKN IVEY.