WSOP: Most Influential Four Players

Quote: gordonm888

Yep, sorry, Johnny Chan, d'oh. <headslap>

Chan is not a great communicator, which is why I wouldn't put him on my list of Top 4 influential poker players.

Someone else who has been influential has been Dan Harrington, who wrote a series of books on playing Texas Hold'em (after the Moneymaker win) that were superbly well-written and that almost everyone read. He helped to popularize and universalize some of the terms in Texas hold-em. He has finished as high as 2nd or 3rd, I think, in the main event but has never been famous as a player. But, come to think of it, he's a better player than Moneymaker.

Phil Ivey does have 10 WSOP bracelets, but he has spent the last 5 years or so playing high-stakes cash games in Asia (like Macau). He's too smart and too focused on making money to have been influential.

Someone who I predict will not be on the list: Norman Chad!

He came out of that Full Tilt scandal without much damage.

Nowadays anyone might win. The days of <<the same five guys mak[ing] it to the final table at the World Series of Poker every single year>> are over. It's as much about luck and intuition as skill these days.

Quote: Joeman

I like Gordon's list, too. Although, I might replace Phil Helmuth with Mike McDermott! ;)

I think what makes Brunson stand out among all the "old-school" guys as being the most influential is his book, Super/System.

Was always amazed by his stamina. From him to play at that level at his age was amazing.

Any list that doesn't include Benny Binion and Moneymaker seems incomplete to me.

Quote: billryan

Quote: Joeman

I like Gordon's list, too. Although, I might replace Phil Helmuth with Mike McDermott! ;)

I think what makes Brunson stand out among all the "old-school" guys as being the most influential is his book, Super/System.

Was always amazed by his stamina. From him to play at that level at his age was amazing.

Any list that doesn't include Benny Binion and Moneymaker seems incomplete to me.

I would have to agree with that.

I've been sold on this.

Moneymaker (clear cut, far and away number 1)
Daniel N: Ambassador.
Doyle: Wrote the first popular book. Interesting character.
Jackie Chan: I don't think there is any compelling case for a 4th. But Rounders.

As our society mirrors the WWE more and more closely, Hellmouth has a role as the (almost) cheating, nasty piece of trash. That's made him famous. But famous isn't the same as influential.

Outside of the post boom era, where a lot of MAWGs thought it made them cool to behave like babies because they thought Phil was cool, I don't know how much influence he's had. Fortunately.

I saw a funny interview with him the other day. I don't usually watch interviews, but for some reason I did. The guy really is kind of a head case. He talks about himself like he is Muhammed Ali, but without any kind of self-awareness or humor. I felt bad that someone so successful could still be that insecure. But also, spending 5 minutes with him would be torture.

Quote: MDawg

Nowadays anyone might win. The days of <<the same five guys mak[ing] it to the final table at the World Series of Poker every single year>> are over. It's as much about luck and intuition as skill these days.

The opposite seems true to me. Yeah, you've got the old, old days, when only a few people played to begin with.

But it seems to me the Robert Verconi, Moneymaker, Reymer era is over.

There are so many online grinders, and the strategy has advanced so far, that I don't think there is much chance for a truly casual player to win the ME.

Actually, I don't think you have much of a shot as a very good, low to mid stakes cash game player. Never mind a guy who plays in home games.

You have to beat thousannds of players who are almost as good as, or better than, the top computer programs.

It won't be the same 5 guys, because there are so many of them. But it will be a bunch of younger guys who have spent several thousands of hours studying and playing and rarely make big mistakes.

They will probably not display much personality on the table, even if they have it. Little table talk. All have the same back story: Between the ages of 17 and 24, Joe was completely glued to his computer mastering poker.

I'm curious to see if unbiased members of this forum would construe the use of drugs while playing poker a performance enhancing drug.?
In sports, the athletes take steroids which help them develop physically, thus helping them within their sport.
If you are taking drugs while playing poker to help you focus, relax, give you more stamina,etc, this could be construed as a drug that helps you mentally.. thus helping them play.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/28288-peds-in-poker/#post578071

Quote: Rigondeaux

...

They will probably not display much personality on the table, even if they have it. Little table talk. All have the same back story: Between the ages of 17 and 24, Joe was completely glued to his computer mastering poker.

Based on this, maybe Dwan is the fourth since he is the poster child for these attributes?

Regarding Hellmuth, I sometimes think he may be what Stu Ungar would have been if he had lived. Wunderkind poker phenom with startling early success.

Quote: WatchMeWin

I'm curious to see if unbiased members of this forum would construe the use of drugs while playing poker a performance enhancing drug.?
In sports, the athletes take steroids which help them develop physically, thus helping them within their sport.
If you are taking drugs while playing poker to help you focus, relax, give you more stamina,etc, this could be construed as a drug that helps you mentally.. thus helping them play.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/28288-peds-in-poker/#post578071

Certainly. There are prescription pharmaceuticals which give players an edge in focus and concentration. Usually prescribed for ADD/ADHD. I also understand there are products developed for military application that allow users to go for a few days without the negative effects of sleep deprivation.

More commonly, there are performance degrading drugs being used, opiods, alcohol, nicotine, THC.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Jackie Chan: I don't think there is any compelling case for a 4th. But Rounders.

You too? Still? After days. lmao

I blame it on the weed. Kids nowadays.

This is the WSOP making the selections, and I believe that Phil Hellmuth has won 12 WSOP bracelets (including one last year), which is the all-time record. And, NO, his name is not spelled Hellmouth although it certainly should be, LOL. And he is actually a nice decent guy away from the tables and does a lot of ambassador type activities. I agree that Brunson, Negreanu and Moneymaker have stronger cases and that Hellmuth may not be picked as #4 - but then everyone will have to endure Hellmuth's whining and disparaging of the WSOP for not picking him..

Johnny Chan? Yep, two M.E. wins when no one was paying attention, but he has done very little during the post-2004 television era of poker. However, it is well known that Lloyd Waner was voted into the MLB Hall of Fame because voters confused him with his much-better brother, Paul Waner. So, in that spirit, maybe Johnny Chan's excellence at choreographing and executing martial arts sequences will put him over the top and get him selected as one of the 4-most influential poker players.

Quote: gordonm888

This is the WSOP making the selections, and I believe that Phil Hellmuth has won 12 WSOP bracelets (including one last year), which is the all-time record. And, NO, his name is not spelled Hellmouth although it certainly should be, LOL. And he is actually a nice decent guy away from the tables and does a lot of ambassador type activities.

I've heard people say this, but have seen no evidence for it.

I'm sure, as an egomaniac, he is nice to people who ask him for autographs or whatever because he craves the adulation, but that doesn't make him a nice guy. Lots of people are nice to people who kiss their butts.

I mean, you are who you are. He has no problem abusing amateurs. He has no problem breaking rules in a way that costs people money, right up to the point of cheating. That's who he is. He only cares about himself.

But, he has nothing to do with me, so oh well.

His achievement of continuing to excel at tourneys after all of the other guys from his era have faded away, and there has been a huge influx of brilliant, hungry young players is tremendous. But IDK about influential.

This is the WSOP making the selections, and I believe that Phil Hellmuth has won 12 WSOP bracelets (including one last year), which is the all-time record. And, NO, his name is not spelled Hellmouth although it certainly should be, LOL. And he is actually a nice decent guy away from the tables and does a lot of ambassador type activities. I agree that Brunson, Negreanu and Moneymaker have stronger cases and that Hellmuth may not be picked as #4 - but then everyone will have to endure Hellmuth's whining and disparaging of the WSOP for not picking him..

Johnny Chan? Yep, two M.E. wins when no one was paying attention, but he has done very little during the post-2004 television era of poker. However, it is well known that Lloyd Waner was voted into the MLB Hall of Fame because voters confused him with his much-better brother, Paul Waner. So, in that spirit, maybe Johnny Chan's excellence at choreographing and executing martial arts sequences will put him over the top and get him selected as one of the 4-most influential poker players.

Everything is clear with the best male poker players. And what about WSOP Ladies Championship?

Phil Helmuth
Johnnny Chan
Doyle Brunson
Phil Ivey

Quote: Gandler

Phil Helmuth
Johnnny Chan
Doyle Brunson
Phil Ivey

An incredible snub of Daniel Negreanu, who has been the affable face of professional poker for many years.

While we're on the subject of poker, poker pro Nick Marchington is being sued by his WSOP backers, C. Biscuit Poker Staking over a refund gone wrong:

https://www.wizardofvegas.com/articles/when-is-a-refund-a-refund/