Re: Stu Ungar hands
[ QUOTE ]
These Stuey hand stories don't age well.
In all the hands you cited in this thread, Stuey was helped along enormously by his opponents' bad play and his decisions usually seem more inspired with regard to the results than the integrity of the plays. If anything, the praise he receives from Phil and others is a reflection on how much more sophisticated our collective understanding of NL tournament play is today than it was when Stuey was in his "prime."
[/ QUOTE ]
right....let's look at this year's final table for this superior NL play:
Example 1: On the flop, holding top pair, terrible kicker, Kanter reraises a bet from Hachem and a rereaise from Barch and then moves all-in after Barch reraises again.
Example 2: Dannenmann goes bust with A3 on a connected board with top pair and the idiot end of a straight draw.
Example 3: Lazar calls Black's preflop all-in with QTo.
Example 4: Lazar calls Dannenmann's preflop all-in with K9s.
Donktastic plays such as these are likely to happen in next year's WSOP just as they have happened in the past. True, Stuey ran goot with both his cards and having such bad donks, but similair things happen. If Raymer's kings had held up this year, would you have said he was a great player or got lucky b/c some donk had tried to catch a runner runner flush?
|