So this is going to sound unworth discussing to many of you. I am interested,though, and I am sure there are others that would be also.
I never was able to watch Stu Ungar play, do to my young age (I was interested in poker though, just didnt think of players as celebrities). From what I have read and heard about Ungar, and from what I have seen in the movie, it seems to me that the starting cards Stu played were utterly irrelevant. This being true becuse he played so well post flop, and almost see right through his opponents. As if he were a super human poker player that there should be no way in hell that you'd want to play for money against.

When I watched the first World Poker Tour when Gus Hansen beat out Freddy Deeb. Deeb made some comments in the post tournament interview to the effect (I know this must not be EXACTLY word for word accurate, but the essence is accurate), that he had had never played with a bigger fish than Gus Hansen, and that he wished he could play in the same game as him everyday for the rest of his life. (Sounds like going to poker hell, if you ask me).

So my question is this: I'd like to ask people to draw comparisons between the two players. Is Hansen a modern day Ungar? Or would it be blasphemous to draw such a comparison?

I know one thing, they could both take their poker books and throw them out the window. I know they both relied hevily on mathematics and odds, but beyond that their games were largely psychological.

Okay, and the last question, who was the better player Hansen or Ungar (I'm speaking strictly of NLHE)?