Jump to content

phil ivey vs. todd brunson


Recommended Posts

This "Todd doesn't play in the highest stakes games" is horseshit.Todd Brunson played in the cash game with the highest stakes in history when he played his part against Andy Beal.So to all you people who say "Ivey plays higher limits, he is better" I would just like to say that Todd played in this game. If I recall, Ivey played in it as well, but Todd played in it and won. So, if higest limits make the better player, your arguments support Todd, not Ivey.I'm not saying Todd is better, I'm saying you need a new argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Are you retarded? Did you not watch Moneymaker at the 2003 WSOP?? He's quite possibly the worst poker player that has won the WSOP ever. Phil Ivey had him dominated and he sucked out on the river and this was one of about 4 times that i saw ( so one only knows how many we missed ) that he was drawing almost completely dead and hit a 2 outer on the river to stay in the tournament. I would drive 2 days to get in a cash game he was playing. I even heard that PetsRus wants him to do a commercial for their FISH department. Also as proof when he got invited to the poker superstars he finished 23 out of 24 real players. Guess hitting 2 outers for a week straight makes you a good player. Chris Moneymaker is the biggest variance ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This "Todd doesn't play in the highest stakes games" is horseshit.Todd Brunson played in the cash game with the highest stakes in history when he played his part against Andy Beal.So to all you people who say "Ivey plays higher limits, he is better" I would just like to say that Todd played in this game.  If I recall, Ivey played in it as well, but Todd played in it and won.  So, if higest limits make the better player, your arguments support Todd, not Ivey.I'm not saying Todd is better, I'm saying you need a new argument.
Ummm. Your thinking of the Andy beal game. Which only happend acouple of times. The big game ( 2k/4k- 4k/8k/ ) is what the people talking about. Todd doesnt play in the big game as often.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If you consider game selection one of the criteria for a "good player' date='" then Brunson beats Ivey hands down on this attribute..[/quote']how so' date=' what are u basing this on.[/quote']Simple -- Ivey exercises very little game selection at all. By his own account' date=' he simply wants to play in the highest game going all the time. This means he's probably always facing the Greensteins, Reeses, Harmans, and Giangs of the world. Because all of these people want to play as high as they can, too, regardless of who is playing.Todd Brunson, on the other hand, wants to play as high as he can in a game he knows he can beat regularly. Rather than grinding away against 6-8 other people who are in his same league, he often makes the decision to play against people he knows he is better than -- often by a substantial margin. T. Brunson has figured out an important fact -- poker is his job, not an ego contest or machismo meter. It's about winning the most you can with the least amount of risk. That's game selection. I'm not being critical of Ivey -- but the fact that he's a total degenerate action junkie is a well known fact. Game selection is not a priority for him (though, frankly, as good as he is, I don't know if that's critical). Brunson can (and has) played in the Big Game and beat it, too. He'd just rather put in an easier workday, I think. If more "mere mortals" (like the people on this board, myself included) exercised this same discretion, we wouldn't have the litany of "I played out of my bankroll and busted myself" stories we're subjected to each week. As someone said earlier in this thread, it's all about game selection.[/quote']Are you saying that just because Ivey always chooses to play at the highest limit he can he is some how makeing a mistake. He chooses to playthese limits all the time becuase he can beat them, while would he settle for lower limits when he could kill the higher one's.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure who quoted me but I never said the following below. I think that Phil is just better and more popular. I mean the guy is called, the Tiger Woods of poker for a reason. Eventhough I got Todd's autograph from WSOP I would really want Phil's. And dammit, Todd needs to shave!

If you consider game selection one of the criteria for a "good player' date='" then Brunson beats Ivey hands down on this attribute..[/quote']how so' date=' what are u basing this on.[/quote']Simple -- Ivey exercises very little game selection at all. By his own account' date=' he simply wants to play in the highest game going all the time. This means he's probably always facing the Greensteins, Reeses, Harmans, and Giangs of the world. Because all of these people want to play as high as they can, too, regardless of who is playing.Todd Brunson, on the other hand, wants to play as high as he can in a game he knows he can beat regularly. Rather than grinding away against 6-8 other people who are in his same league, he often makes the decision to play against people he knows he is better than -- often by a substantial margin. T. Brunson has figured out an important fact -- poker is his job, not an ego contest or machismo meter. It's about winning the most you can with the least amount of risk. That's game selection. I'm not being critical of Ivey -- but the fact that he's a total degenerate action junkie is a well known fact. Game selection is not a priority for him (though, frankly, as good as he is, I don't know if that's critical). Brunson can (and has) played in the Big Game and beat it, too. He'd just rather put in an easier workday, I think. If more "mere mortals" (like the people on this board, myself included) exercised this same discretion, we wouldn't have the litany of "I played out of my bankroll and busted myself" stories we're subjected to each week. As someone said earlier in this thread, it's all about game selection.[/quote']Are you saying that just because Ivey always chooses to play at the highest limit he can he is some how makeing a mistake. He chooses to playthese limits all the time becuase he can beat them, while would he settle for lower limits when he could kill the higher one's.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you retarded? Did you not watch Moneymaker at the 2003 WSOP?? He's quite possibly the worst poker player that has won the WSOP ever. Phil Ivey had him dominated and he sucked out on the river and this was one of about 4 times that i saw ( so one only knows how many we missed ) that he was drawing almost completely dead and hit a 2 outer on the river to stay in the tournament. I would drive 2 days to get in a cash game he was playing. I even heard that PetsRus wants him to do a commercial for their FISH department. Also as proof when he got invited to the poker superstars he finished 23 out of 24 real players. Guess hitting 2 outers for a week straight makes you a good player. Chris Moneymaker is the biggest variance ever.
i'm not a moneymaker fan, but i'm sick of everyone bashing him, especially in the hand when he sucked out on ivey. if you remember, ivey sucked out on him first, hitting a miracle 2 outer on the turn. money maker had 7 outs on the river. phil got more lucky than moneymaker. i'd like to see you put all your money in with nothing against sammy farha, or call dutch boyd down with pocket 3's because you felt your were best in the biggest game you'll ever play. you can't even figure out how many outs he had to beat ivey. the cards ran his way, but no more than they did for raymer. i totally respect raymer's game. i think he's head and shoulders above moneymaker, but the deck ran over him. he never had to make tough deciscions, and he won every race. he was never in harm's way. moneymaker made some bad calls, but he earned more pots than raymer. he also should have earned a little respect. he's not the best, but i'd like his chance against u.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to have alot of respect for Phil heads up, but not so much anymore. In Tahoe he lost a 1.4 mil to 350k chip lead by donkeying off his chips on completely naked draws.Then this week I've seen him playing Pralahd Frieman (sp?) on Full Tilt (Spirit Rock) and I watched him suck out 4 different times for 80k on Pralahad. I mean, I was beginning to question if it was really Phil playing. He was calling/going all in with middle pp and just a huge dog. Several times Pralahd had higher pp when the money went in, only for Ivey to catch the two outer. Obviously this just applies to Hold'em, but I think there's something wrong with the mentality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Q&A with Doyle on ESPN.com he said something to the effect that his son was the best young player out there with Ivey coming in a close second. Sorry, I don't have the exact quote. If anyone wants to post it feel free. Anyhow, do you guys think that doyle is biased here or is Todd Brunson really that good? I know he's an excellent player, but is he really at that level?
i would play both of them in golf..... for any amount
I have 2 buddys that u can play for any amount. One is US Amatuer champ Nick Flanagan. How much you wanna play for????????? he is in US right now.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall Todd played in the highest limit game ever with the Corporation and faired the best out of any of the pros, including Chip Reese, Doyle Brunson, ect. and they asked Phil to play against Andy Beal and he said the stakes were too high and he wouldn't do it. I don't know who the better poker player is but I know who has more balls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't belive Ivey would be scared to play high stakes. I've read interviews with him where he has said he'll play for very high stakes. He says he wants to play in games where it will sting if he loses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I used to have alot of respect for Phil heads up, but not so much anymore. In Tahoe he lost a 1.4 mil to 350k chip lead by donkeying off his chips on completely naked draws.Then this week I've seen him playing Pralahd Frieman (sp?) on Full Tilt (Spirit Rock) and I watched him suck out 4 different times for 80k on Pralahad. I mean, I was beginning to question if it was really Phil playing. He was calling/going all in with middle pp and just a huge dog. Several times Pralahd had higher pp when the money went in, only for Ivey to catch the two outer. Obviously this just applies to Hold'em, but I think there's something wrong with the mentality.
u gotta realise phil drained tons off parlad already 80 percent of the time they sit ivey ebat him, and that tournament at tahoe u can see he didnt really care, he just didnt want to win :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ivey is the better player for sure.You don't know this. Stop basing your opinion on media coverage and hearsay. How many times have you played with both of them?We hear about Ivey alot more for a reason.Many of those reasons being that he is young, attractive, and a minority.You need to play both tournaments and cash games well and Ivey does that.So does Brunson. Brunson didn't play hardly any tournaments at all until the past 18 months or so. His results are pretty damn impressive.Both are great players. But we have no idea who is better.
One thing ive noticed on this forum people say one cant tell who is the better ploayer from what they have observed. That is wrong, i know you all see ivey owning up just about everything. Y ou dont have to play a player to say how good he is. For example Chris Moneymaker, this guy has no skills whatsoever, of course he finished first in 2003 of a hugge field but he is not a great player...Now what have phil ivey done although he has messed up luck on the Wpt tours you always see him at the final tables, because hes good .
how can you say moneymaker has no skill at all? you cant just win a tournament that big without knowing what your doing. and yes you would have to play against him to know how good he is. you cant judge his play by a few hours of SELECTED hands played by espn. everyone with phil ivey avatars are biased towards phil.
Look at MoneyMaker's finishes in the main event the two years after he won. He busted out on day 1 in 2004, and day 2 in 2005. He sucks. He made so many mistakes in 2003, it's amazing that he won. How many final tables have you seen him at? Not many, the guy got lucky, and he has yet to prove otherwise. On the other hand, Raymer has proven himself time and time again.
Link to post
Share on other sites

i think there both great players. But ivey is a great cash game player and a great tourny player. As brunson is a good cash game player and lacks playing in tourny.. so overall i would have to say ivey is a better player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is everyone speculating on this subject when they have no idea how good Todd Brunson can really be. I mean has anyone ever seen him play more then a few hundred hands? Has anyone watched either of these players live? I mean its all speculation and heresay as all we know is that they are both successful players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ivey is the better player for sure.You don't know this.  Stop basing your opinion on media coverage and hearsay.  How many times have you played with both of them?We hear about Ivey alot more for a reason.Many of those reasons being that he is young, attractive, and a minority.You need to play both tournaments and cash games well and Ivey does that.So does Brunson.  Brunson didn't play hardly any tournaments at all until the past 18 months or so.  His results are pretty damn impressive.Both are great players.  But we have no idea who is better.
One thing ive noticed on this forum people say one cant tell who is the better ploayer from what they have observed. That is wrong, i know you all see ivey owning up just about everything. Y ou dont have to play a player to say how good he is. For example Chris Moneymaker, this guy has no skills whatsoever, of course he finished first in 2003 of a hugge field but he is not a great player...Now what have phil ivey done although he has messed up luck on the Wpt tours you always see him at the final tables, because hes good .
how can you say moneymaker has no skill at all? you cant just win a tournament that big without knowing what your doing. and yes you would have to play against him to know how good he is. you cant judge his play by a few hours of SELECTED hands played by espn. everyone with phil ivey avatars are biased towards phil.
Look at MoneyMaker's finishes in the main event the two years after he won. He busted out on day 1 in 2004, and day 2 in 2005. He sucks. He made so many mistakes in 2003, it's amazing that he won. How many final tables have you seen him at? Not many, the guy got lucky, and he has yet to prove otherwise. On the other hand, Raymer has proven himself time and time again.
thats what i meant to say man wel lsaid lol
Link to post
Share on other sites

Although Doyle said he never taught Todd anything, I'm sorry--I just don't believe that. He never gave him any advice? Yeah right. I just don't buy that crap. As for Moneymaker, yeah he's a donkey, but I think he did finish top 3 at the final table of the Bay 101 Shooting Stars Event. (Probably sucked out a bunch of times to get there.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont feel like reading the rest.. but todd brunson played for the highest ever limits in a cash game with beal. he made over 20 million$ in this game, so I dont know why ppl are saying he plays lower limits than ivey

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve Cleveland: IF Phil Ivey wins the Main Event, is he officially the best poker player in the world? Phil Gordon: He already is the best poker player in the world, even if he doesnt win.Irving (Santa Barbara, CA): Ive recently been trying to make a move to bigger games (NL 1000, 2000). However, Ive been told that this is where the most collusion takes place. What are your thought about this and cheating altogether in poker? Phil Hellmuth: Everybody always says that when you get to the high stakes games there is a lot of cheating. I've heard that my whole career. That's what people who don't know any better say. I know the guys who play 1000, 2000 and it's not collusion it's just you are facing the best cash game players in the game today. Phil Ivey has destroyed them at the highest level. With collusion, he would never have done what he was able to do. Drew (Chicago): If you were heads up in a big tournament who would you least like to be your opponent? Howard Lederer: Phil Ivey. Just a side note .. he is now at his fourth consecutive final table today in a major tournament ($10,000 buy in or more) .. that's extraordinary. Will ( Baton Rouge LA): What Pros do you consider the most dangerous in this event? Howard Lederer: My favorite for this event is Phil Ivey. I think he's the best player on the circuit right now. Vito (PA): Pound for pound, excluding yourself, who is the best "card" player in the world? Robert Williamson III: I wouldn't be on the list unfortunately! I'm good, but not among the best. Phil Ivey or Chip Reese would be my pick. I think Negraneau is the best tournament playerMike B. (Shelby, Twp. , MI): Phil,Phil,What would say is Phil Ivey's greatest strength as a competitor? Mike Matusow: He's just the best player in the world. Has the best focus of any player I have ever seen. He seldom makes a mistake. Nobody has half the conentration he has. Clearly the consensus among pros is that Phil Ivey is probably one of, if not the best player in the world, and none of them even mentioned Todd Brunson. These opinions are from people who actually play with both of them, not just forum posters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
dont feel like reading the rest.. but todd brunson played for the highest ever limits in a cash game with beal. he made over 20 million$ in this game, so I dont know why ppl are saying he plays lower limits than ivey
How stupid are people on this forum? How many times do we have to point out that The BIG GAME IS NOT THE GAME BETWEEN BEAL AND THE CORPORATION. Brunson plays 400-800 regularly and the big game occassionally. He can jaw on all he wants about game selection, but he does not make the kind of money Ivey makes int he big game. If he was really a favorite in the big game he would play in it. I mean why play at all, if your not gonna play in the highest game you are a favorite in? Last time I checked you judge whose better by who makes the most money since thats the object of poker. Its fairly clear that Ivey makes more than Todd.P.S. Its not like the Bellagio spreads a 2-4k and 4-8k at the same time. It either 1.5-3, 2-4, 3-6, 0r 4-8. 400-800 is the limit below the big game, though I believe 1-2 is spread occassionally.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...