Daniel Never Talked About Stu Ungar Why?

[mcd DONKKK 0]

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................noones disputes my comments but yet the all just stood or sat their while MCDEE went on his pathetic rant and some even agreed..................jus lost a lot of respect for you people here...do you have no concept of the real poker world...did you not get how outrageous his comments truly werePAFINGTHETICif this was a test to the validation on the FCP forum you all failed horribly....

[flyingdonkey 0]

noones disputes my comments but yet the all just stood or sat their while MCDEE went on his pathetic rant and some even agreed..................jus lost a lot of respect for you people here...do you have no concept of the real poker world...did you not get how outrageous his comments truly werePAFINGTHETICif this was a test to the validation on the FCP forum you all failed horribly....Man you really need to get laid!!!!!

[beans-n-icewater 18]

Ok, where the hell is DN???I cant believe he just gives us the brush-off like this....I cant drive without detonation or worries about oil life, and the wife cant ride in them until her problem is solved (new seats)....meh...I'll go ask Farha or Brunson

[ricker 0]

Long thread and a lot to say.

Seriously, I don't get what the cult of unger is all about. Sure, he had talent. Some consider it a trageic waste of talent. I don't. Unger is pretty much the archetype of what not to do was a professional poker player. Unger didn't have leaks in his game. His whole life was a lleak. He was a complete action junkie. And this style of being an achtion junkie happened to be successful in tourniment play back in the day, because people played very conservatively, and layed down to his aggression in tourniment play. It was the perfect meeting of style and opportunity. Unger was undoubtably talented, but his flaws are so massive that it out weighs any of that. Sklansky is a better poker player than unger, you know what? 'Cause he's a successful poker player... he makes money off it. Any of you guys who grind away in .5/1 games showing a profit are better players. Because unger was a loser. HE was self destructive, masochistic, compulsive and addicted. While he could go on tears, could go on massive runs, most of the time he was flat broke because he was such a action junkie fish. People need to drop this cult of unger, he's just about the worst person ever to idealize in poker. I'll take guys like Greenstien, Ivey, Mihn ly any day of the week. That's not to say thant Barry and Ivey aren't action junkies, 'cause they are. But they are successful gamblers, and that's the difference. Unger was just a loser.

His whole life was a leak, no one is disputing that at all. However to blindly refer to a style that I doubt you have had any personal experience with and wax philisophic doesn't make any sense. You can absolutely say that Ungar was a troubled person, but to say that someone who did dominate the poker scene doesn't deserve fans is truly rediculous. It's ok to idolize a person's professional accompliments while ignoring their own personal failings. JFK was a womanizer, Churchill was a drunk, Washington owned slaves...yet these people are looked on in history as great men because of what they accomplished in their professional life. I don't know about you, but winning 3 ME titles seems pretty damn impressive to me, no matter how badly he threw his life away.

You always hear stories of great calls Stuey made, but you never ever hear about one great laydown."

Everyone has their style and Ungar's was the most aggressive and sucessful of his time.

Chill out. What are you, his son?

no, just FWP being a dickhole again

[Guitarmy 0]

But Daniel probably just played some cash games with him. What do you gain from playing some random cash games with anyone?????????

Boy, thats a discrediting statement for you. Maybe you should just stop now before you say anything more naive.But I do agree, who cares what Daniel thinks about Stu Ungar?

[mcd DONKKK 0]

dickhole again??? not trying to get off topic or else i would of said FWP an the end of the response.....most of the FCPers comments here are fing disgusting...he is an idol of mone..if i had to make a liost he is probably me fing hero... he had issues serious issues as do I... but he dominated whenever he wanted to...hes the best poker player ever which makes this whole thread absurd....FUUUUUUUUUCKING ABSURD....... but im preaching to 10 dollar donkeys who wouldnt understand....dont flame me out of respect to ungar...the rest of this thread should be about how ridiculous it is to insult SU...... guys just realize BEST POKER PLAYER EVER PERIOD

[InertGrudge 0]

This is just a post saying that ricker and me...we're on the same page.This makes him a smart, smart man.

[ricker 0]

This is just a post saying that ricker and me...we're on the same page.This makes him a smart, smart man.

hah!I never claimed to be a smart man, but I know what love is Jenny....

[mused01 0]

someone ban mcd donk. it's obvious he's foxwoodspro. btw, don't measure our validity and integrity over a internet forum.we're just not as worked up over a internet user's opinion on someone we don't know and one that will have no effect in our lives one way or another.please, get a life.learn to respect other people's opinion. how do you know stu ungar was the "best poker player alive!11!111" Were you there to play with the man? Do you have ONE hand history? One hand he played? No, all you have are other people's OPINIONS to go by. You are an impressionist and a romantist that loves to believe in fairy tales of godlike heroes.and my segment of playing dr. phil is done.

[mcd DONKKK 0]

10-20 users have the right to respond to my posts...sorry you are th weakest link................I really dont wanna get off topic though... stu scary talented, raw talent just like me.............we dominate

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

that's the point, he's personal failings were why he was a bad player.

[JMotrain 0]

that's the point, he's personal failings were why he was a bad player.

And those same failings are what Chip Reese said make Stuey a great player because he never cared about the money. He might have died broke, but if he hadn't died and cleaned himself up, he still could have made a lot of money. Whether or not he would have held onto it is another story.

[TheWatchMan 0]

if you asked me for someone to play poker for my life, im picking chip reese or brunson.but i love stuey, he wa sthe most talented NL tournament player ever..its a shame he didnt fulfill his potential, but his tournament success was still astounding.you think that people played that conservatively back then? they were the best players of the time.. sweeping statements like that are stupid..and as for gin rummy, he was the best ever.barry greenstein has built his life around discipline, thats probably why he frowns upon stuey so much. stuey didnt know discipline, but he was still the man. you think he made many calls ( when sober ) like the one against mansour matloubi, and was wrong?cos i sincerely doubt it.MICHAEL JACKSON IS A LEGEND... personal life aside.STUEY UNGAR IS A LEGEND... personal life aside.DOYLE BRUNSON IS A LEGEND... personal life aside.see where im coming from?

[ricker 0]

that's the point, he's personal failings were why he was a bad player.

His personal failings made him a bad poker player? Seriously, how do you come up with this stuff? Personal failings do not make a great poker player lay down a set because he knows he's behind in the hand. Personal failings do not keep players like stuey from making mediocre players lay down TPTK when all he holds is bottom pair no kicker. Whether or not he goes out that night and does coke off a stripper's ass doesn't make him a bad poker player. Prolly not someone you want to bring home to mom, but his personal failings do not detract from his skills.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

His personal failings made him a bad poker player? Seriously, how do you come up with this stuff? Personal failings do not make a great poker player lay down a set because he knows he's behind in the hand. Personal failings do not keep players like stuey from making mediocre players lay down TPTK when all he holds is bottom pair no kicker. Whether or not he goes out that night and does coke off a stripper's ass doesn't make him a bad poker player. Prolly not someone you want to bring home to mom, but his personal failings do not detract from his skills.

you don't think being a degenerate detracted from his skills?

[antistuff 0]

dickhole again??? not trying to get off topic or else i would of said FWP an the end of the response.....most of the FCPers comments here are fing disgusting...he is an idol of mone..if i had to make a liost he is probably me fing hero... he had issues serious issues as do I... but he dominated whenever he wanted to...hes the best poker player ever which makes this whole thread absurd....FUUUUUUUUUCKING ABSURD....... but im preaching to 10 dollar donkeys who wouldnt understand....dont flame me out of respect to ungar...the rest of this thread should be about how ridiculous it is to insult SU...... guys just realize BEST POKER PLAYER EVER PERIOD

you lose. if you don't know why then you lose again.

[loxo 0]

MICHAEL JACKSON IS A LEGEND... personal life aside.

NO

[Athos 0]

If interested in SU, read Dalla's "One of a Kind." Fascinating read.

[TheWatchMan 0]

NO

YESking of pop

[Athos 0]

Just went back and checked; looks like Daniel was at the last table that Ungar ever played at (according to Dalla).Others mentioned were Melissa Hayden, Ralph Perry, Perry Green, and Erik Seidel.

[minorityreport 0]

Actually, DN gave his opinion about Ungar a long time ago. I don't have the link to that particular post.He said something to the effect that Ungar was certainly a great player, but not as great as the public has made him out to be. That is to say, he isn't THE greatest tournament poker player to have ever walked the earth. He had a turbulent and tragic personal life which was cut short--this added to his legendary image and mystique. Ultimately, although he had talent, his poker skills are far more exaggerated by storytellers than they really were.

[mcpickl 0]

This might surprise some of you, but I agree with BigDMcgee on this one. Ungar was simply playing so much more different from everyone else at the time that he was able to dominate. His style wouldn't hold up today, against either fish or skilled players. There was a quote I heard when someone was discussing his call with J high against Mansour Matloubi in their HU match, that "You always hear stories of great calls Stuey made, but you never ever hear about one great laydown."

the quote is Barry Greensteinsedit: my bad already mentioned above

[scatory2 0]

Although he's played professionally since he was 17, Negreanu didn't begin to develop his signature style until he was 23. It was 1998 and, as a newcomer to Las Vegas, he was playing with world champion Stu Ungar and Erik Seidel in a no-limit game at the Bellagio. Negreanu sat to Ungar's immediate left, which meant he was always forced to react to Ungar's play. Ungar was only months away from his drug-induced death, but managed to bully the table relentlessly even on autopilot. "He was in complete control of every hand," Negreanu says. "Every hand went through Stuey. Everybody had to be completely aware of him at all times."Negreanu calls the evening "the biggest revelation of my poker life." The lesson: By dictating the action, you can knock other players out of their comfort zones.

[Athos 0]

"his poker skills are far more exaggerated by storytellers than they really were."But the majority of the "storytellers" are some of the best/ most respected players in the game.

[zimmer4141 0]

OK, let's look at a few things objectively here. Stuey was extremely overaggressive, and somewhat of a calling station. This style worked for him back in the day when many players were conservative and tight, so he was able to pick up a lot of small pots. Doyle said that Stu would've lost his first ME title if he ever had top pair beaten. Also, that 10 of 30 stat can be called into question seeing as how the fields in those tournaments were likely all under 100 players. I'm not saying he wasn't a great player, but I don't think he was this mammoth legendary force that was unstoppable.