[TheBlueMonster]

[ QUOTE ]
Raymer came in like, what, 25th this year. Obviously impressive, but there is something to be said for final tables, of which Harrington made two in a row.

[/ QUOTE ]
No offense, but that makes no sense. YOu have to look at the field size in relation to how they placed. 2003 the field size was around 800 and Harrington made the final table. 2004 the field size was around 2500 and both made the final table and Raymer won it. 2005 the field size was around 6000 and Raymer came in 25th (after a really dumb beat).
Frankly this whole "best at..." debate is silly because you can make a legit argument for any player. You could legit. make an argument that Matasow is better at post-flop decisions than Jen H. Or that Chip Reese is better all around than the OP's man crush Phil Ivey.
Armchair poker players just aren't qualified to make these type classifications.




that's what Barry Greenstein is for [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]