I know there isnt a single answer or anything, but what does he have over the common man? Is he a math wiz? Does he have a really high IQ? Did he ace his SATs? Or all of his skills learned/developed and he's just a normal guy like the rest of us? It would be awesome if he has no special abilities because it would motivate me to improve, but I doubt it.

Anybody have any insight?

I believe he's said he's not even that into the math.
Zero tilt factor, incredible concentration and ability to pick up on and relentlessy punish opponents who show weakness.
That plustons of experience is why IMO

this alone would put him in the top 5%

I just heard him talk on the wsop main event coverage on ESPN. He's been playing since he was a little kid, started play 7 card stud. Lived outside of Atlantic City, and had a fake id as a teenager to play. Played home games as a teenage...

He has been a professional since he was in his early 20's, and won a bracelet in early 20's. So now he's been a pro for over a decade...

Plays at the Bellagio, for up to 24 hours straight, against the world's best players.

On top of that, he says he thinks about the game relentlessly, he thinks about the game before he goes to sleep, and when he wakes up in the morning.

He has always played a very loose style of play, so it gives him a lot of experience, since he knows almost every situation.

He still says that to this day, he is learning a lot about poker, and learned 5 new things during this years wsop main event, that has made him an even better player. He also says he spends time analyzing past hands.


But on top of that, he says that he can think well, and put himself in other people's position well. He knows how to play the situation and the people, and can successfully play a wide range of hands. He can accurately assess what other people are thinking, how they think they way they do, why they think that way etc.

He is an expert at all types of poker, from limit 7-card stud, to no limit holdem, so he certainly brings skills from one form of poker to the other (actually, none of his bracelets are in holdem).



Supposedly he's gone broke, he says that in his Atlantic City days, there were months when his electricity got shut off because he couldn't pay his bills etc.


But anyways, it's really about skill, with experience, with the ability to play loose aggressive, and be very accurate with his reads. Controlling the situation, and knowing what to do in most situations. Fearlessness, and the willingness to risk his chips on bluffs if he can sense weakness. With all of his knowledge from all forms of poker, he has a lot of knowledge and experience to draw from.

Plus, he's probably very much a natural.

HE said during an interview that he played practically everyday, 12 hrs a day for 5 yrs.

because eh doesnt afraid of anything

I've heard one of the math geniuses (Terrence Chan or Matt Hawrilenko forget which) who has played him a bunch say that even though he may not articulate his strategy mathematically, if you were to map his understanding of poker you'd find that he'd intuited a very mathematically and strategically powerful strategy. That is hes a maths genius without even trying. Kind of depressing for the rest of us.


I'd say that he is insanely intelligent. This could be true even with a low IQ and SAT scores, but thats another argument.

I'd say nearly all of his skills are learned developed but I believe his is able to learn and develop skills in a way that is way way above normal. And his brain and temperament are predisposed to being good at poker. And I'd say he's also worked and continues to work extremely hard. And I'd guess that he'd achieve in an hours hard work what might take me a month, a year, a lifetime so.....

You should only try to be the best you can be and know that it wont touch the best Phil can be.

Yeah, I think the "10,000 hour principle" mentioned in the book Outliers applies here. For those unfamiliar it basically says those in the top of their field have generally put in 10k+ hours at it. Another gem from it is when you're thinking about giving up you're often right on the brink of getting there. That last part isn't related to the discussion at hand, but I find it interesting and in the same theme. I believe just raw experience and pure volume of play has put him up there.

whats the name of the book (and author) that talks about this principle?

I think it's his blank stare that does it for him. If you are able to copy that look you should be as successful as Ivey.

Fear Equity... He wins cos people are afraid of him and the more he wins the more frightened they become...its a viscious cycle

The book is "Outliers" you can find more info here gladwell.com

Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell.

It's a good book (along with his other books 'Blink' and 'The Tipping Point'), in which he makes the following point:

People who excel in a profession/discipline are often the ones who were given the opportunity to practice their discipline a lot. In other words, circumstances led to increased opportunity to practice, which led to exceptional mastery. It discounts the effect of 'talent' (i.e. genetics) in favor of environmental reasons.

I guarantee he is off-the-charts in pattern recognition ability.

I thought it's obvious?

He's a savant.

Not to get off subject on why but I can tell you I gained so much repect for him after reading "the professor, the banker and the suicide king". That is a good read.

I agree. A very good read. It gives a glimpse into the minds of many poker pros. They are all degenerate gamblers.

Phil Ivey is so good because...

He understands betting patterns, logic, and body language with the best of them. Phil knows what amount to raise before you even make that standard bet into him. Once Phil has a tell on your betting patterns, he can play virtually any two cards against you. Phil has worked hard at poker and probably puts in more hours playing than you do anyway. He has won WSOP bracelets in multiple forms of poker (2xPLO, StudHL,SHOE, 2xStudH, Lowball, Omaha/Stud Mix). Phil can play against most types of people and how they approach the game. Phil can exploit you, he knows the right time to raise when you have the second best hand. Phil can play against strong players and weak players hence the WSOP 09 Final Table of ~6500 people starting.

The following post is very long but it has some amusing real hands from this year's WSOP main event with Ivey and Hellmuth involved but mostly your hero Ivey. They are illuminating to say the least. Clearly he is involved in countess others that he outplays his opponents.But not here!

<<<They are all degenerate gamblers. >>> Good one and probably true at heart at least, although unlike the other gamblers they dont stop there and move on to brain quality after declaring that first SIN loud and clear first for all to hear every day of their lives. Prop bets anyone ? Last cash game in poker after dark Ivey was flipping the black or red flops with the other "degenerates" for amounts per trial far exceeding the current game at hand or its natural volatility!!! It was a mega joke of insulting proportions from the best of them. BS! i say ! Shameless too ! A diservice to poker really when you see that on live TV. Where is the amusement in flipping flop colors? One more reason for the idiot politicians to think gambling 100% and forever when they reflect at poker...


On Ivey;

He is excellent , intelligent and lucky long term so far and worked real hard at it from a very young age to develop natural discipline and reading skill further, thats all (in fact all the famous ones are probably lucky during their lifetime in streaks that last years- you can bet on that they are all in some minimal but meaningful good long term lucky streak of at least 1 sd over expected for their already superior skill) . And he is a gambler no doubt. A lethal trio of qualities with only the skill lasting which by now that they are well financed and famous is enough to weather any bad luck ! And of course all those things and the name add an intimidation factor too. Well deserved though.

But i dare everyone that loves him to defend these few questionable choices in this year's WSOP main event 57 (final table still pending to finish the event) this year (2009) ;

Blinds at 60-120k antes 15k

<<<Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:51:29 Marco Mattes Doubles Through Phil Ivey. Nick Maimone opened his second consecutive pot, making it 290,000 to go and was met with an all-in reraise from Marco Mattes for 2,470,000. Ivey flat-called the all in and Maimone folded. Mattes QdQh Ivey JhJd The flop was Th5h5c , Mattes' queens still leading. The turn was the 7d, the river was the 4d and Mattes doubled to 5.41 million while Ivey fell to 6.3 million. >>>

I mean really do you call with one raiser and an all in and other people left to act with JJ? I mean what range does the guy that responds with all in to a 3bb open raise has that JJ is good for here with others pending to act and the original raiser. I say the all in guy is easily a range that doesnt care about future players and the original reraiser all that much and this is usually here TT-AA,AK . The guy is doing it with 2.4mil on a 300k raise so he is not doing it with small pairs or AQ ,give me a break . His range leaves Ivey with 43% here on a pot he has yet to put money in and with the original raiser to act plus whoever else was behind him . And he did that with 30% of his stack really. You go ahead and tell me he is not sub flipping here. The fact is if you consider the others that have yet to act plus original raiser this move is easily negative chip EV let alone bloody tournament EV for one of the best remaining players if not the best who should be worth a much better usage for his chips here.

That example here illustrates very well that indeed his skill is massive in some other places than the obvious math analysis which in my opinion he has an excellent grasp of due to experience and intuition but not as well as he should by pure study.

Tell me what is 43% of 5.41 mil ? 2.32 mil. So he used 2.47mil to have under perfect conditions (ignoring all others which is a no no) out 2.32mil . Big deal you say and i agree with you that its a tiny error but it only shows he doesnt care for coin flips really when he can afford it . This is even worse than coin flip when you consider all the other details . The guy that goes all in with many left including people that covering him to a raise is not doing it with garbage hands . Feel free to add 99 and AQs to his range and it still isnt plus EV for Ivey to get involved. The first raiser all along has a 7-8% chance even if raising with a wide 30% range to have QQ-AA in his range and we even ignored that detail including whoever else was left to act after Ivey.




Here is another one from the same event that doesnt look all that good;

<<Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:06:56 Smith Strikes at Ivey in First Feature Table Hand Jordan Smith made it 275,000 to go from the button and Phil Ivey called from the small blind. The flop was 4h5c6c and both players checked. The turn was the As. Ivey checked to Smith, who bet 325,000. Ivey came in with a raise to 800,000 and Smith made the call. The river fell the Ah and Ivey checked. Smith checked behind. Smith showed Ac9c and Ivey mucked. First blood to Jordan Smith! >>

Nice bluff? Not really. I mean the other guy raised preflop and he didnt cbet at flop but bets at the ace . Right? So what kind of player that is not bully at flop bets the ace now on a draw heavy board and has raised preflop agaisnt Ivey? Also i wonder what kind of hands call the raise from SB ignoring the BB and then on the board that emerged are not good for at least some bet at some stage before the bluff. And the bluff by the way needs the other guy to be folding how often to really work well? Who bets 300k on a 600k pot and then folds to 500k more, often enough to make this a good idea? Does his bluff make sense actually? Isnt it very likely the other guy is on Ace-x here given so far activity?

But anyway thats a minor thing and we dont know his hand here but it just shows the mentality at this spot of a loose style that is not exactly a good idea in my opinion here.



The next one is similarly strange regarding his range based on what happens post flop;

<<<Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:25:45 Dangerous Board Ahead. Phil Ivey opened for 320,000, Jordan Smith raised to 1,000,000 and Ivey made the call. Smith checked the QhTs5s flop over to Ivey, who checked behind. The Qs fell on the turn and both players checked again. The As on the river prompted an excited "oooh" from the crowd, but they checked it down again. Smith turned over Ad9c for two pair and Ivey mucked.>>>

What hands does Ivey have here that deserve an EP raise then a flat call to a big reraise but no action at all all the way to the river especially at flop when checked to him? Sounds gambling again or what? Because clearly its not AK,KK,AA,QX,JJ,TT,AT,JK,55 etc all which should probably have deserved the kind of action you saw preflop when blinds are like 50-100k (or 60-120k) you open raise with others left to act and then call the big reraise? What are you calling with that didnt connect at all in any way possible even for a semi bluff here? And the other guy had A9 lol and it was enough hehe! Plus he didnt even have a flush, more lol , because it eliminates further other good to decent hands too. I mean further more no A9, no AT,no AJ, no A5. What could he possibly have that made sense to play so expensively this way ? Sure many hands left but you have to agree that all of them make miserable not meaningful sense to play this way up to that point where the board starts looking ugly ...Doesnt it sound too opportunistic for you?

Again we cant have full understanding because we dont know his hand BUT...


The next one is more clear though; Blinds again 60-120k or near that (maybe 50-100)

<<<Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:43:54 George Caragiorgas Doubles Through Phil Ivey . George Caragiorgas opened for 400,000 from UTG, Phil Ivey reraised to 1,150,000 from the small blind, Caragiorgas moved all in for just a bit more and Ivey called. Caragiorgas 2c2s Ivey AsTh. Though it typically gets quite noisy in here at the feature table during an all-in, it was unusually quiet during this confrontation as the Ivey fans braced themselves. The flop was Jc6d3c , the deuces holding. The turn was the 9s, the river was the 4c and Caragiorgas doubled up to 2.64 million. Ivey was left with 5,435,000. "Taking chips off Phil is not the way to make friends with this crowd," quipped Tournament Director Brooks Turk. >>>

Basically let me ask you this here because i find the hand ridiculous from both players. The small stack from UTG! open raises 3bb or a bit more using 35% of his stack . Is he stealing here? Can he really be folding now? Fat chance, right vs so many players? From UTG a bluff noway when so small stacked. He has something (although here he had the worse stupid hand for such move i guess of the usual suspects) . Besides the ridiculous fact he opened not shoved with 22 which is a total garbage idea since he then called anyway (meaning he didnt raise with intention to fold to an all in for him looking only to safely steal , so why the hell not go all in all along to improve fold equity or fold the bloody hand which is probably even better given the bubble situation (re final table) and payoff skyrocketing soon . Then our hero Ivey AsTh puts the small stack all in ignoring the big blind as well with ATo? Seriously? What does the other guy have here that such move with ATo makes sense ignoring the big blind. Can you say the UTG guy has any pair plus A9o+ plus AsXs even (pushing it a bit here)any broadway mostly suited maybe?

Can you say another 46% idea and in fact if the guy is only doing it with the hands he should be doing it ie pairs and top AX only maybe also JTs,and KQs QJs only that make sense to play this way from such small stack from EP ie at least as wide as 22+,A9s+,KQs,QJs,JTs,A9o+ then Ivey is looking at 41% only here ignoring even the Big blind's chance for a super hand which is still a decent 3-4% (totally messing the EV of the choice if he shoves!) that is crashing Ivey's hand big time and can force him to fold instantly (depending on his stack of course) .

Degenerate behavior right? I mean give me a break! If you play guys so loose then you give them the chance to become a big problem against you, a quality player, so easily. He basically has no fold equity here. He can flat call or fold in my opinion. flat calling is equally indimidating to the big blind if the guy has a hand outside the top 10% anyway . Fold this damn thing instantly here unless you are the big blind and even then its still better to flat call and see a flop because the other guy is not folding and you can always bet the flop and get the same result right? In this case the 22 would not call your cbet in that flop you can count on it by the way!!! LOL

Here is another one that is also AT , he loves that hand apparently, and which is also looking an expensive AT for a guy with Ivey's stack when its down to 11 people left !!!
Blinds are now 120-240k which makes the all in all that more ridiculous and the call too!

<<<Jamie Robbins Eliminated in 11th Place ($896,730) Jamie Robbins moved all in for 2.35 million and Phil Ivey made the call. Robbins KcQs Ivey AhTh The flop didn't help Robbins, coming down 8s3s3d . The turn was the 3h, the river was the 5c and the crowd full of Ivey fans roared as their man took down the hand and sent Jamie Robbins to the rail in 11th place. Ivey is up to 9.61 million. >>

So basically if he had lost this hand another sub coin flip given his potential range (he is lucky the guy was stupid with KQo only which is probably the worse hand he could go all in with still - another moronic move when down to 11 and at 10bb especially if you know by now guys like Ivey call you light) he would have been at 4.7 mil . Flippers!!! big time, even IVEY. At least this time was suited and more towards a real coin flip vs his range. But KQo shows how stupid light these guys can be when small stacked .Anyway KQo is still in the top 10% shoving range i suppose for someone with 10bb left. ATs is only 43% vs that range. Plus we dont know from the hand played if he was the Big blind or made the call from an even earlier position which would have been real bad too.


Basically i mentioned a few hands only because i want to show that nomatter how good these guys are there are still things they do that show they are flippers at heart. Pure and simple. And dont tell me you need to flip so eagerly at this point. At least do the flipping from a safer point where you are the aggressor . Anyway.

If you examine how Phil Hellmuth got eliminated this year at the same event the way he played AA slow vs 3-4 others when small stacked you will be laughing real hard. Sorry to say that !!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIC2MQ3A46o

What on earth is he doing not reraising preflop with AA??? And then he says they are some of the worse players! No they are not when you allow them to see a flop with this bs! And by the way if someone at this flop vs 3 left to act goes all in then yes the AA maybe is a fold here or at least a near neutral call Mr. Hellmuth. Thats why you raise preflop . And thats why you make the huge fold if it gets so ugly vs 4 others at flop because clearly you now are sub 50% here when the guy that goes all in ignores 3 others on that board. It still may be plus EV to call maybe depending on the other player's style but clearly post flop AA vs 3 others with one of them very aggressive is a bad sign on JT flop. The guy is not going all in with AJ or QQ,KK often enough to be worth it (because he didnt reraise preflop either- he wasnt the initial preflop raiser) . And then you have the others left to act which can have all kinds of draws or big hands too that when added to the first player threat makes you very sub 50% here for your tournament life. All because he didnt reraise all in preflop a 3.5bb raise with 22 bb left or at least to 8bb to force him to call him lol ( i call that the ridiculous reraise) . Give me a break when you flat call 3.5bb you invite at least a couple more to do the same by the time you get to the blinds when you have AA.

Here is how it happened in more detail than the video. Blinds are at 3000-6000. Notice how stupid it was when he had 135k total at the start of the hand.

<<<Sat, 11 Jul 2009 19:35:06 The Fall of Caesar -- Hellmuth Out . Before the flop, Abraham Mourshaki raised to 22,000 (3.5 bb) from early position, and Phil Hellmuth flat-called from late position. Jose Manuel Gomez Rebenaque then called from the cutoff, Kenny Hsiung called from the button, and Kevin Jenkins also called from the big blind. No report if Hellmuth uttered "et tu" or anything similar after all of the callers. The flop came JcTd5c. Jenkins pushed all in for 83,000, Mourshaki folded, then Hellmuth reraised all in with his last 110,000. Gomez folded, and Hsiung called. Jenkins 9h8h Hellmuth AcAs Hsiung JhTc, Jenkins had an open-ended straight draw, Hellmuth the overpair, and Hsiung two pair. The turn was the 7d, giving Jenkins the straight. The river was the 3s. Jenkins won the main pot, Hsiung the side pot, and Hellmuth has been eliminated. >>>


The blinds plus antes are 2.25bb, the raise is 3.5bb . What on earth are you flat calling with AA here for? If you reraise at least the others ( that won the hand and side pot ) would be gone and the original raiser might fold or give you more action which is great when you have only 22.5bb left. Since when is a minimum 6bb profit here uncontested and a potential double up if called a problem!!!! GRRRRRR. And he has the audacity to call them bad players! Of course he is better than them no doubt but give me a break playing this way!



Believe you me guys they are all of them very MORTAL.!


One last one from Ivey because i am tired searching through these guys, i have had it with what i find. I am convinced they are not that good as people think they are when examined in the dirty detail that doesnt often get to be televised fully. Still they are better than me but maybe not for life and not because i am fully developed yet when i play live as i am when i study it later ! Certainly they are not better than some that post here who for one reason or another havent had that big celebrity break yet, maybe because they are too damn responsible in how they play to experience that first degenerate bloody millions explosion to starship status. But dont worry the stock market is another way to get there my friends. And then maybe we will be heads up one day at some final table when 10k looks like a tiny ticket for fun with your family in the audience.

<<<Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:23:29 And the Double-Ups Keep Coming We've had what seems an inordinate amount of players surviving their all-in bets and doubling up this level -- the kind of thing that can potentially wear down a player's patience. Just now, Phil Ivey raised to 260,000 from the cutoff, and Jordan Smith reraised all in from the small blind. The big blind folded, and Ivey took a moment to consider the situation. "How much is it?" he asked. Smith was all in for a total of 2.035 million. "I don't know if I can take this anymore," he added. Ivey thought a moment longer, then made the call. Smith showed Ad9h and Ivey Ah8c. The community cards came 6cTc9sQhTh , and Smith is now up to 4.4 million. Ivey slips to 11 million. >>>>

That was even more ridiculous than all the ones before. And please spare me with the typical he spotted a weakness kind of garbage-logy.


Massive reraise all in called by A8o , enough said. That A9o all in was pretty ridiculous too with blinds still so low when facing a raise. And by the way i am not as tight as i may appear. There is time to risk but its better than that. Its just that these guys are ridiculously flipping like there is no tomorrow. If Ivey flips that way imagine the others that have won main event past few years what kind of jackassious luck they needed. At least Ivey only rarely flips and the rest of the time probably capitalizes on it . I still havent seen him flip for his life though in the hands i examined so its not as bad yet in this event. We will see in November. Certainly from the remaining 9 he deserves to win it the most at first consideration but then again maybe we needed to have seen all the other guys too and how they got there. Maybe there is one out there that played a bit better...The universe knows already...Ivey's fans will hate me but too bad because i am still one of them just not religiously blind...

^^^^^^^^^^ el oh el

he bleeds poker... the smartest people in the world wont be good at poker just cus they are invested in other things. Ivey is a machine... plays longer then u can simple as that.

durrrr is better than ivey

he worked so hard on his game like not many people else and he get rewarded for it because he has the skills which are missing most of us...

permanent concentration, avoiding tilt, adjusting his play whereever possible, reading abilities, physical strength... etc

It upsets me that somebody spent so much time thinking of this garbage, let alone bothering to write it down.

It bothers me a lot more that you quoted the whole thing but don't have anything more to say about it than this.