Is Gus Hansen a Fish?

[Jordan Olsommer]

Forgive me, father, for I know not what I'm doing. :P I haven't been on these forums long, so I dunno what the general consensus is on this matter, but in the latest craptacular issue of "All-In" (the magazine that everyone thought was dead, and then resurrected in such a form that everyone wishes it actually had died), in an interview Doyle says "But listen, all the top pros love to play with Gus. That's all I can tell you."

Is Gus Hansen a losing player in these cash games? It would be surprising, since listening to the commentary on the WPT DVDs (which are actually worth buying, unlike a certain magazine which I wasted five bucks on), Daniel Negreanu pretty much idolizes Gus and says that his style of play is mathematically sound and The Right Way to Play.

Not knowing much about the big-game gossip, my initial hypothesis would be that Gus might just be the spitting image of Stu Ungar: someone who's almost unstoppable in tournaments because of his relentlessly agressive style, but who gets crushed in cash games because he doesn't play anywhere near as tightly enough.

Am I in the right ballpark here, or is Doyle just giving a liberal dose of Vague Implication? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[kenberman]

Barry G. could comment intelligently on this topic, but almost no one else on this forum can.

my .02

[trying2learn]

fish is most certainly the wrong word.

at that level, none of those players are fish...some are just better than others. when your limits are that high, you don't need much of an edge to make a killing.

[M2d]

Maybe Gus stops by Krispy Kreme and picks up a couple of dozen to share before playing, so all the big players love to have him in the game

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe Gus stops by Krispy Kreme and picks up a couple of dozen to share before playing, so all the big players love to have him in the game

[/ QUOTE ]

Comic Gold.

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
fish is most certainly the wrong word.

at that level, none of those players are fish...some are just better than others. when your limits are that high, you don't need much of an edge to make a killing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wha? I think that's silly. "Fish" is a completely relative term. To paraphrase the old saying, if you're the 9th best poker player in the world and you're seated with the top 8, well, you're the fish.

So perhaps my question could have been better phrased, but the point remains the same - is Hansen an overall long-term winner in that game, or is he a "provider"?

...Or does he just spring for the Krispy Kremes every time he drops by?

[lighterjobs]

in the pot-limit omaha section of super system two, lyle berman says all the big game players like to play with sam farha, but that doesn't mean he is a fish. they probably just like to gamble with gus hansen.

[ttleistdci]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
fish is most certainly the wrong word.

at that level, none of those players are fish...some are just better than others. when your limits are that high, you don't need much of an edge to make a killing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wha? I think that's silly. "Fish" is a completely relative term. To paraphrase the old saying, if you're the 9th best poker player in the world and you're seated with the top 8, well, you're the fish.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm...no. It means you're the 9th best player in the world.

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
fish is most certainly the wrong word.

at that level, none of those players are fish...some are just better than others. when your limits are that high, you don't need much of an edge to make a killing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wha? I think that's silly. "Fish" is a completely relative term. To paraphrase the old saying, if you're the 9th best poker player in the world and you're seated with the top 8, well, you're the fish.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm...no. It means you're the 9th best player in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK fine, let me exaggerate so you can understand what a relative term means.

You're the 9th best player in the world, and while you are playing at the Bellagio with the top 8 (where you are oh-so-clearly not a fish), a nuclear war breaks out and the only survivors are the occupants of your table at the high limit poker room.

You're playing in the exact same game with the exact same people, but now you're the worst poker player on the planet.

The key here is it doesn't matter whether you're the worst poker player on the planet or just the worst player at the table you happen to be at at the moment; relative to the game you are currently playing (which is what matters, unless you frequent some wonderful paradise of a card room where players from other tables just stop by and hand you chips without sitting down to play), you're a fish.

Which is why the saying goes, it does no good to be the 9th best in the world if you're sitting down with the top 8.

Like I said in a previous post, you can change it to "provider" if you feel like (because I get the idea that both you and the other poster have trouble getting past the idea that "fish" means "absolutely terrible poker player", and of course I did not use the word in that sense at all, which a cursory reading of my posts would make clear), but poker is a zero-sum game; if you're the worst person at the table, you're the fish and you're paying everybody else over the long run. I'm genuinely puzzled as to what about that is so hard to understand.

[jojobinks]

barry g did comment on this. he says that gus draws dead in the big game. read on...