[benkahuna]

That's the guy. He did imply that was only when his gut gave him a strong signal. I think he said something like "when listening to my gut instinct, I've never lost a hand." Never lost a single hand--c'mon that's absolutely ludicrous and no one would ever try to express that thought.

He's just saying he's used intuition when playing and that it's served him extremely well. Many poker books recommend doing the same. He was probably just answering a question from the interviewer anyway.

As for Phil, he's a fantastic player that you can frequently observe having the best hand AND knowing it. He is annoying for sure. He's an egotistical, overconfident, self-absorbed child when playing poker. But, that doesn't change the fact that he's a fantastic player. Nine bracelets (and he's much younger than Doyle and a fair amount younger than Chan, the only guys with more bracelets), six in no limit and 3 in limit would suggest maybe he's maybe his poker skills deserve some respect. His hand reading and intution are widely regarded as his greatest strengths.

There are lots of players that speak highly about their game in general and about a particular aspect of their game. Sklansky and Greenstein are among these. Greenstein has mentioned himself in this manner only very briefly--pretty much just being honest when it comes up.

Michael Konik about Sklansky: "It's not arrogance if you can back it up."

I shouldn't really fight this though. This thread is much more about emotional decision-making (let's bash people that we decide we don't like on tv) than a rational attempt at fairly considering people. Bash away.