I think it goes more the other way actually. Everyone would like to bluff Ivey so they can tell the story about when they bluffed the best in the world. I know if i was on his table in a tournament id be far more inclined to make a big play against him than someone else just so i could be like yeah im the man.

Because good quality young gun poker players lack confidence and are therefore afraid to try to beat the best?

When it comes to advice about poker, my attitude is very simple: seek it out, absorb it, but while you're at the table, forget it.

I'm a firm believer in learning the game by playing the game. I'm not saying there aren't a lot of great resources around to help players improve their games or that poker books and tutorials don't have their place. They do. However, the problem I see with people who rely on these kinds of aids is that they end up playing poker like someone else or - even worse - like everyone else.

One of the things that makes poker great is that it's a game where there's really no right or wrong way to play. Every player has their own approach to the game and the key, in my opinion, is to take the things you learn from other players and incorporate them into a style of play that works for you.

There are some players who take a very mathematical approach to the game, and for them, it works. They study the odds and make decisions based on whether they think they're getting the right price to commit their chips to a pot. It's a solid way to play, but the fact is, it's not the right approach for everyone. What's more, even the best of these players will tell you that math only takes you so far.

Calculating the odds can certainly help you decide whether you're making a smart move, but it doesn't take into account who you're playing against. There are many times when you can do all of the math you want and your decision still comes down to intangibles and a feeling about your opponent or the situation you're facing. Does this guy have a hand? Can I push him off the pot? Am I getting myself into trouble here? Even if the odds say you should play, your gut may be telling you something else, and that's something you can only develop by playing.

Relying too much on other peoples' advice can actually make it harder to develop this kind of reading ability because it tends to clutter up your head. You get so focused on thinking about odds, probabilities and strategies that you forget that you're playing against someone else and that you have to try and figure out what he or she is doing. Are they scared? Will they fold to pressure? Are they a maniac? In my opinion, these are the important things to keep in mind during a hand.

It's been said before, but it bears repeating. Poker isn't about the cards; it's about the players and the situations. Winning players understand that sometimes you have to take chances. Sometimes they work and other times they don't. Whether you win the hand or not, you have to make the play that you believe is best.

At the end of a hand or a session, go back and study the things you did well and be honest with yourself about where you made mistakes. Don't, however, overanalyze how you could have played a hand differently because this can negatively impact how you approach your next hand or session. Identify your mistakes, learn from them, and move on. Just because some play or move didn't work the way you wanted doesn't mean you were wrong to try it. As I said before, there are just some things that you have to learn by playing.

So here's my advice. Read this tip. Read other tips and poker books. Talk to your friends. Absorb as much information as you can. But at the end of the day you have to trust your instincts and play your own game - not someone else's.


Phil Ivey

I think most of the internet players gave him respect right away, though I think a few of the high stakes players doubted him initially.

Good post though.

Since conception...It was inevitable after that glorious night when clark banged lois!

Wasn't it quite the other way. When he started playing online most nosebleed regs who played against him (OMGClayAiken, cts, whitelime) thought he was a weaker player. I can kinda understand that, he is doing a lot of stuff usually considered to be fundamentally wrong, like playing 70% of hands OOP in NLHU etc. It is so uncommon in online poker to see really strong players do anything like that, so it's very understable that it took some time before his opponents realized how good he really is.

Obv it's unlikely that anyone thought he is bad or anything, but just didn't consider him to be better than avarage player at those stakes.

FYP

You believe Ivey has down syndrome? :s

amen

Read the Harringtons. He says that Hellmuth was the best holdem player in the 90s and I believe him. Hellmuth has some sick WSOP stats from that decade.

Best all-around player: used to be Chip Reese, currently Ivey obv.

This made me lol

Got to disagree there Phil, there are lots of wrong ways to play.

^ permaban?

I've actually wanted to know this as well. I always wondered why he was one of few successful live players who adjusted well to the online game. I wish I was 1/100th the beast he is.

For me it was when he was no.1 tournament earnings and no.1 online earnings (this might've been in '09?). Seriously this guy crushes both online cash AND live tournaments (documented, I'm sure he crushes live cash too). It's rare for such success in both.

I do agree with a previous poster that being *Phil Ivey* would have people playing differently towards you than they would play against someone they classify as LAG. I think this would be in the form of polarising ranges.

There will be some people that bluff too much and some that never bluff, Ivey's smart enough to know which is which. Also, I can't see many people going for the "thin value bet", "thin value check raise" or "quadruple range merging" against him. Must be nice.

i remember erik123 said ivey was pretty weak online but learned quickly

Bump thread.

I'm trying to work out when Ivey moved to Vegas. B Greenstein said somewhere Ivey wasnt a great player when he 1st made it to to the BiG Game. What year was this, 2000? When he won his 1st bracelet. So he was in Atlantic City til he was 24?

from the time he was born.

Who the F is Emile?

Ivey wasn't always the best, he put in the work tho and earned it.

Heard stories that he played like 16 h a day for 5 years.

i remember hearing stories of nosebleed online regs saying ivey sucked and then quickly changing their opinion as time went on because he adjusted to them

Emil is whitelime, him and krantz and several other dc guys used to murder the nosebleeds couple yrs back

This is why he is the Eddie Murphy of poker.

Not ******ed, but an extra chromosome only has negative effects when viable.

when full tilt gave him a piggy bank pretty much.

not necessarily, if you have an extra sex chromosome it can be fine, something like klinefelter syndrome

fine to a degree, but it certainly isn't something you would want to have. It can be pretty bad to have.

Unless I am poorly informed I don't believe it ever brings a positive effect. If you know of one that does I would be interested in reading about it.

I'm pretty sure he first started playing the Big Game after he won his first bracelet in 2000. So it would have been late 2000 or early 2001. But I don't think he actually lived in Vegas then. The year he won three bracelets (2002), I remember him saying that he had recently moved to LA, but by then he was playing in Vegas a lot. I don't think he actually moved to Vegas until 2003 or 2004.