If I'm a voter, I write in Isai Scheinberg every year and leave it otherwise blank. Without him, this "HOF" is a joke and not worth of anyone's attention.

Tod Brunson has long been inducted while Huck Seed is just now coming up for a vote? Come on man!
Couldn't agree with you more.

notsureifserious.jpg



I know this has been covered many previous times on this topic, but attempting to discuss the Poker Hall of Fame always frustrates me, because we flat-out have incomplete information. We don't really know what people did in cash games, and we only know the wins (without the losses) when it comes to tournaments.

I won't go further on that subject because, again, that road has been traversed too many times already.

From my age group and my part of the country, casual baseball fans are aghast that Will Clark is not the Baseball HOF. They simply can't believe it. As kids in Northern California, they saw Clark as a diamond god. (Poker fish Jose Canseco was the counterpart, but the Oakland fan base is smaller, plus his many falls from grace have tarnished what could have been similar memories.)

But if I show these fans Clark's overall credentials, they're actually surprised to see where he actually rates on the all-time baseball ziggurat. Good player? For sure. Six-time All-Star, MVP candidate for several years running, lifetime .303 hitter. Certainly had some HOF-caliber moments and seasons, but Will The Thrill's overall body of work just does not measure up to the standards for Cooperstown.

And it makes sense. My age group had to search a little more to locate the empirical data, and casual baseball fans were not the type to pore over the Baseball Register or the Baseball Encyclopedia. Thus, their knowledge tends to be more visceral, sometimes anecdotal, and lousy with the exposure effect. In their minds, Will Clark is on some sort of baseball Mt. Rushmore for those individuals because he flourished at just the right time and in just the right place for their memories.

[Note: somewhere in Wisconsin, a bunch of fortysomethings feel EXACTLY the same way about Cecil Cooper. And I'm certain there is a version of this for every sport, every age group, every vicinity around the world.]

Now imagine if we did not have a Baseball Encyclopedia or a Baseball-Reference.com to consult. No baseball cards from the era that we can flip over and show to make our points. In fact, imagine if baseball did not keep the meticulous statistical data that it does. Now think how hard it would be to discuss the Hall of Fame merits of any player without having that data.

Yet this is what we seem to deal with when it comes to the Poker Hall of Fame. In the same way that time and geography puts a premium on Clark to my NorCal baseball friends, the TV boom make personalities from the early to mid-2000s loom larger in our memories than equally accomplished players from other eras.

And without data to support either side of any argument, any talk about a player's Poker HOF credentials ultimately comes down to "I remember..." –*both from fans and fellow players alike.

Great post and points WT.
Being from Boston, most here expect David Ortiz will be a hall of famer but his regular season numbers aren't really all that out of the ordinary.
Some people even here argue against him because he also was mostly a designated hitter.
But at the end of the day, in any hall of fame, shouldn't the popularity and persona (the name recognition,fame) of the person for consideration factor in? I mean, Bigio is in the baseball hall of fame and nobody hardly knows who the guy is. Where as, Ortiz is has huge name recognition in all of baseball.

Didn’t biggio have 3K, hits and an exceptional feilder?

So only players from the Yankees or Sox make the hall of fame lol come on man

Sad that after all these years, Sklansky and Caro remain on the sidelines.

Ted forrest, huck seed. At least half the list is not nomination worthy imo.

Ted and Huck just for winning that marathon bet alone. Oppie a close 3rd.

What a weak list. Moneymaker may get in, but he just got lucky in one tournament. Ferguson is not going to get in because of you know what. Some of them, like Elezra don't seem to even be that good.

It will be bjorin and Forrest. Trust me.

I always thought Elezra was rich business fish in the High Stakes Poker.

Ferguson has to get in at some point, may as well be now. Antonio's a fine pick, so are several of the others. But frankly, so far as impact on the poker world we live in today, it's Chris and Chris. The fact that Moneymaker is not in yet shows how out of touch the decision makers are.

Yeh, from what I have seen there and in mixed games on Pokergo he seems to play sort of loose donk style. He does have 4 bracelets.

Ever 3rd year they should add a 3rd person. Need to add some Europeans and non-players.

I'd pick Ted and Bjorin.

In full agreement.

It might be helpful to keep the requirements for entry into the PHOF in mind:

- A gambler must have played poker against acknowledged top competition,
- Played for high stakes,
- Played consistently well, gained the respect of peers,
- And stood the test of time.
- Or, for non-players, contributed to the overall growth and success of the game of poker, with indelible positive and lasting results.

Great joke!

😂😂😂

Hes a successfull book author.

Moneymaker gets too much credit imo. Poker blew up because of the hole-card camera and online poker. The poker boom happens even without Moneymaker, although he was the cherry on top.

Matusow and Forrest.

Why?
Part of the requirements are those whose contributed to the growth of poker.
For the creation of this very site you are benefiting from, he should qualify, let alone all the groundbreaking books he wrote.

Huck Seed and Chris Moneymaker.

Moneymaker is way too much of a one hit wonder. I don't know if he has even cashed the ME since 2003. Most of the guys on that list have much stronger overall credentials.