LA Weekly-Phil Helmuth Article(very long)

I'm not sure but I don't think he has played the most WSOP events, I'd think Doyle would probably have. And the number of events isn't as important as the fact that he is third all time in WSOP bracelets. As for him running well, he won the heads up championship, and made some incredibly smart plays during that event and usually does when I've seen him. He had that smart laydown in this years WSOP where after it he said he could dodge bullets (can't remember exactly how it went but he folded top 2 pair).

I'm not calling myself the worlds biggest Helmuth fan, far from it, it just boggles my mind to see people ridicule him on here or not call him one of the top players with the numbers he has put up before. As for him running well, every tournament requires things to fall your way somewhat for you to win, from starting hands to what it looks like when the board is finished.

Just my thoughts

[TStoneMBD]

i remember when he made that fold and did the whole i can dodge bullets baby routine. i dont remember the precise hand but i remember it being such an easy and laughable laydown. his opponent was an oldtimer who was very passive/predictable with excessive tells. if he was truly impressed by his laydown in that spot then he should be ashamed of himself because thats just basic poker. i give phil much more credit than that though and figure it to just be a camera ploy (and a good one at that).

I don't think it was an easy laydown. I thought I remembered it being a tough one. I thought he flopped top two pair and then folded to something on the turn that gave his opponet trips. Maybe I don't remember it as well, but I thought it was a tough one and the announcers were talking about how great it was. Anyways..perhaps my memory is off of it, who knows!

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it was an easy laydown. I thought I remembered it being a tough one. I thought he flopped top two pair and then folded to something on the turn that gave his opponet trips. Maybe I don't remember it as well, but I thought it was a tough one and the announcers were talking about how great it was. Anyways..perhaps my memory is off of it, who knows!

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, Daniel Negreanu has actually written that Johnny Chan and Doyle Brunson combined haven't played in as many WSOP events as Phil Hellmuth. He's probably exaggerating, but the point still stands.

Second of all, why does this have to be about absolutes? Phil Hellmuth is obviously a very talented tournament poker player, no matter what you think of him, I was just honestly trying to explain why some people don't put him in the top 10 or even the top 50.

The hand in question, Phil had AK and this old guy to his left had AA. Phil had raised pre-flop and the guy reraised. The flop was A44 - Hellmuth checked, the guy checked behind. The turn was a Q. Hellmuth checked again (I think) and the guy bet twice the pot. The tightest player at the table had reraised preflop, and, on the A44Q board, Phil's AK is now behind AA, AQ, and QQ. Just saying.

[TStoneMBD]

yah i remember the hand now. omg such an easy laydown against that player. if phil called that turn bet hed literally be horrible. its not even necessarily the hand itself its the player he was up against.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
And the number of events isn't as important as the fact that he is third all time in WSOP bracelets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course the number of events is important. If you play 30 WSOP events a year, you better win a few.

Just counting bracelets is a horrible way to evaluate tournament skill. Not only does it fail to consider how many attempts you've made, it also fails to consider the size of the field. Older players are going to have higher numbers just because the fields were smaller.

I'm sure there are tons of players with superior results to Phil on a per tournament basis. Phil is very good, but not the third-best player ever.

He is also a known cash game donator. Games fill up when he sits. This is probably partially because he lacks the technical skill of excellent players, but also because he is so tilt-prone.

"Daniel Negreanu in All In magazine said the top players lick their lips when they see him coming to a cash game."

it's funny when Daniel Negreanu says stuff like that, when people call him up and offer him rides to cash games that they are playing in.

So now we have concluded almost that two players I thought were some of the greatest playing are cash game donors. I give up on this crap, it doesn't make my game any better and you get a different story on a different player every time you talk to someone. Continue the debate guys, but I think I'll shy away from thinking about this stuff anymore. Opinion, favortism, all get in the way. Both are better players than me, I can assure you of that!

Go to barrygreenstein.com and read his Player Analysis section.