Quote:
Originally Posted by answer20
Phil Ivey definitely was on his way and is definitely still there in some minds, but how much will his 'bump in the road' cost his poker legacy
L
Probably zero since he had a solid run from around 2003-2013 where most people thought he was the best all-around player. From the fan perspective, it's a little sad that we haven't seen much of him in MTTs in the last decade, but he already had an epic reign prior to that, so his legacy is secure in that sense.
This stuff is always hard (impossible?) to quantify without knowing what's really going on in the cash game streets, and a lot of that stuff is bound by a code of silence to a certain degree. My only thought is that Ungar seems pretty overrated by a lot of people. The three WSOP titles are impressive, but his story is as much about instability and wasted potential as sustained dominance. He's closer to being the Len Bias of poker than the Michael Jordan of poker. People who played in that era don't seem awed by his cash game performance, as it sounds like he was too inconsistent and temperamental to reliably play his A-game. Meanwhile those people speak really highly of Chip Reese, who may not have the prodigy/genius thing that makes Stuey fascinating, but was probably a bigger winner.
Ultimately it's a fool's errand though to do these rankings because we simply don't have enough information about buy-ins, wins, and (most importantly by far) cash game performance. I can't even tell you who the top 5 players are right now, much less all-time. People like durrrr, Ivey, and Jungle who seemingly play massive live cash frequently are not even messing with MTTs for the most part, so there's very little public data by which to judge them. I'm sure there are others like that.