Well, we've heard Ray and Masons opinion of Stuey...

[Ryan_21]

...lets see what others had to say about his poker and gin playing ability.

Taken from the Las Vegas Review Journal, Reporter Joe Shoenmann reports that:

Bob Stupak states:

"He was the best," Stupak said Sunday. "You can't expand on that. The best says it all."

and

Sklansky agreed, saying that "when he was at his best, he seemed to play almost perfectly."
"I don't know if he had a photographic memory, but awful close," he said. "He could calculate very quickly and did (instinctively) all the things I write about."

These two opinions from Stupak and Sklansky are regarding poker.

These statments are out of an article written by Mike Sexton:

"When anyone talks about the greatest poker players of all time, Stu Ungar's name will surface immediately. If it doesn't, it should. His accomplishments in poker are second to none. He is considered by many (and put me on that list) to be the greatest No Limit Hold'em player of all time."

Regarding Gin, Sexton states:

"I first met Ungar in 1978. He was a 22 year-old (who looked 14) streetwise, fast-talking whiz kid out of New York. He ventured to Las Vegas to play high stakes gin rummy against all comers (and he played anyone for any amount). He defeated them like Secretariat handled the Kentucky Derby."

And

"As great as Ungar was in No Limit Hold'em, he was better at gin rummy. Several months after he captured his third world poker title, Ungar said to me, "Some day, I suppose it's possible for someone to be a better No Limit Hold'em player than me. I doubt it, but it could happen. But, I swear to you, I don't see how anyone could ever play gin better than me."

Sexton also states:

"Ungar turned to poker in Las Vegas when his gin action dried up."

Finally, lets here from Nolan Dalla.

Dalla is writing the Biography on Ungar and on the inside jacket of the book he states:

"In the final years up until his death, through months on interviews, Dalla was a close confidant to Ungar, and was chosen by Ungar to be his biographer."

And regarding Gin, states:

"He was a savant in a world of card sharks and con men. A high school dropout, by 17 he was widely acknowledged as the world’s best gin player. Mafia wiseguys instantly recognized Ungar’s awesome talent and staked him against all comers. Eventually, no one would play him for cash anymore."

You can flame me all you want, and say I accept news and journalism with blind faith or whatever, but Im pretty sure Stupak, Sexton, and Dalla knew Stuey a little better than Ray and Mason. If anyone thinks Im bs'in them the articles are viewable at http://www.wsop.dk/Ungar2.htm

Ryan_21

[MMMMMM]

Didn't Doyle Brunson weigh in more on the side of Ray and Mason regarding Stuey's skills, or am I mistaken?

[Howard Burroughs]

You are correct.

BTW, Doyle has posted on 2+2 (I don't believe in a while though).


I remember reading the post Bill Murphy talked about from Doyle (a long while back) that agrees with what Ray has said.

[Howard Burroughs]

But..........


Stupak was his backer.


Sexton is a tournament dude.


Dalla's a great writer.




None of them are in a class of poker player as a Ray Zee or a Doyle Brunson (who both think Ungar is WAY over rated as a cash game limit poker player).



Why not just accept that Ray is telling the truth?

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
You can flame me all you want, and say I accept news and journalism with blind faith or whatever, but Im pretty sure Stupak, Sexton, and Dalla knew Stuey a little better than Ray and Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no question that's the case. But I just happen to be right.

MM

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can flame me all you want, and say I accept news and journalism with blind faith or whatever, but Im pretty sure Stupak, Sexton, and Dalla knew Stuey a little better than Ray and Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no question that's the case. But I just happen to be right.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

That's money.

Book idea: Quotes from Authors and Posters on 2+2.com. Special chapters devoted to Mason, Tommy, Bryan, and that guy with the animal fetish, then clump the rest in the back of it. Only one I remember from DS is ending recommendations that are far from obvious to half the people who post here with: "Can you see why?"

It'd have to go in the humor section of the book stores, and maybe not have given away that it's related to poker -- to sell more copies (as it wouldn't be instructional or always topical), but I think it'd be worth a few hundred grand after word got out.

~D

[Ryan_21]

We've all came to agree upon the fact that he probably wasnt a very good ring game limit holdem player. So why do people keep bringing it up? Its irrelevant to my argument.

My argument is trying to stick up for his NL Tournament play and his Gin game.

Furthermore, why does one have to be in the class of Ray Zee and Doyle Brunson to judge someones play? Who says you have to be a world class player to make a judgment? Sportswriters judge althletes abilities and they are certainly not in the same class as the athletes? So that point makes no sense.

Ryan_21

[Ryan_21]

So your saying that you and Ray didnt know Stu as well as Stupak, Sexton, and Dalla, but your opinions are still right even though you didnt know him as well? Thats a pretty brave stance to take, I mean people flamed me b/c Ray knew him better than me.

Ryan_21

[MaxPower]

Do you have any knowledge of Stu Ungar other than what you have seen in the media?

Did you ever play against him or see him play for an extended period of time?

I know nothing about him other than what I've seen in the media. I am inclined to believe those who have first hand knowledge of him and generally know what they are talking about.

Sexton will never say a bad word about anyone - he is the ambassador of poker, so his views are not diagnostic. Stupak was apparently a friend and not considered a great player or theorist. Dalla is writing a book on Ungar that he wants to sell. They each have their own agenda, so their opinions do not mean much to me.

Sklansky has never held back his true opinions about players, so I am inclined to believe him. But even in the quote you cited, he doesn't say that he was the best ever or world class. On top of that, given the way the media works there is a good chance that his quote was taken out of context, was misquoted, or elicited.

Ray Zee has nothing to gain or lose by expressing an opinion on Stu Ungar and he is an acknowledged expert. I'm willing to believe a first hand account from him more than what I read in Cardplayer or see on ESPN.

My point is that very few people on this forum have any first hand knowledge about Stu Ungar and how good he was. That doesn't mean our opinions are worthless, but they are not as meaningfull as those of Ray Zee and others.

Its clear that Stu Ungar was a very talented card player. I don't think anyone is disputing that.

[Homer]

Furthermore, why does one have to be in the class of Ray Zee and Doyle Brunson to judge someones play? Who says you have to be a world class player to make a judgment?

You do, in the thread "Stu Ungar FACTS". You said:

So, if you are not up +$30 million or better shut your f'in mouth about the deceased and give the man his props.

-- Homer