How to Play Poker Videos

do u guys think that doyle,chan,and hellmuth r greats? compared 2 2days players like daniel negrano phil ivey?

Public Comments

1. Yes. Chan was a methodical player and one of the best. The only thing I have against these guys is that they paved the way for the popularity of the game. TV came around it and now every yahoo thinks they can play. It really has screwed up the tables and tourneys in the casinos since that happened.
2. It's very hard to say. Yes Chan, Doyle and Hellmuth have more WSOP bracelets, but then again, it was a lot easier to win them back in the old days when they won them. Now it is so much harder to be good every year and win, Daniel Negrano does not have many bracelets but always makes final tables and is always a good player and is amazing at figuring out what cards his opponent has. Phil Ivey is a great player because he plays off instincts and just knows when he has the best hand., Ivey also has 5 or 6 bracelets i think mostly in an era where they were harder to win. It is hard to compare. they are all great, only hellmuth, chan and doyle have played longer so they have more wins to back it up.
3. Let me ask you something: Do you think Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Lou Gehrig are greats? Of COURSE Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan and Phil Hellmuth are greats. Daniel Negreanu (note spelling folks) and Phil Ivey are two of today's best players... and Daniel actually has four bracelets... which is pretty good. Finally, I'm not sure why previous answerer is complaining about all the "yahoos" sitting at his table now. If you're any good you should be taking money from those "yahoos...." that's a GOOD thing
4. Yes! they are great! Brunson and Chan are legend, they're also playing the big mixed game at Bobby's room at the Bellagio with Ivey and Negreanu actually. For tournaments Brunson and Chan have 10 bracelets, and Hellmuth just won his 11! That put him in front for that. Take care
5. of course they're greats, all of the players you mentioned are great...and i think it's extremely difficult to compare the time in poker when hellmuth and chan, but especially doyle were young guns in the poker world like ivey and daniel are now, mostly because the popularity of poker has taken off...so i don't think that they are really any greater than people like ivey, negreanu, etc., but that their results do speak for themselves
6. They're good at poker, but better at cash management. That's the important thing in becoming a pro. You lose, you win. Being able to cover your losses is important. That's what they need to write their books on...not poker strategy, but money strategy. I wouldn't want to be like that jacka** Matusow, who's been in debt more times that one can count and has been to jail.