Poker Discussion Post

sharkusmanly:

-1998 doesnt even show up to main even to defend his title ( woulda won)

By this logic Tiger Woods dosen't have to show up to the next major tour event. We can go ahead and chaulk it up to past accomplishments.

Stuey= Live Poker Superuser Account

The only person that could beat Stuey at any game was the man in the mirror.  He was a true genious and more self destructive than anyone you will ever meet.  He was also an action junkie.  He would bet on the way a rain drop would land.  He was never happy because the action was never enough.......very sad.   We can all learn a little bit from his addictions.

the most interesting post on here i have read.

 I don t learn much about poker on here a most of it is a matter of opinion

However it is very interesting to see how others look at it

stu unger was the greatest gambler alive, case closed, he would of had 4 plus Main Event Titles, OBV, and what do you think no one was good at poker back in the 80's or 90's your crazy then, Johhny Chan won back to back during then, is he bad too? How bout Huck Seed 96 he sucks? how about Helmuth, garbage? Scotty Nguyen 98? Dan Harrington 95, trash?  Next time bring a case when you neglect stu's skills

yep

People that slam folks like Stu for 'wasting their lives' are the bulk (99.99%) of the people in the world - dull, vapid white-bread nobodies that will never live anything but uninteresting lives.

True genius almost always comes with some baggage, so what if there's a few bugs in the cake, the cake is still delicious.

i heard he was on drugs......is this true?

He smoked a little weed....what of it?

He was a major coke fiend. Snorted so much he burned his nose off.

zander:

Out of morbid curiosity, where does Ungar fit in the arguments along the line of if Babe Ruth were alive today he'd have a hard time even making it to the bigs? He was a pioneer of agression in a time when a preflop reraise meant kings or better with very few exceptions, and now that everyone is aggressive (and a lot of those aggro players have heads on their shoulders which don't simply donate away to countless vices off the table) and the player pool of talent is much, much deeper, where do you think he would rank if he were playing now? also, lol at (woulda won) next to every tournament he didn't play while he was alive... his edge over the field may have been pretty big at the time, but it could never be big enough in a game where there is that much short term variance.

The arguments side with Stu, simply because its not like he was playing that long ago... He won the main event in 1997 which isnt that long ago... Also, many player that were playing in his time(or even WAY before his time) have still outlasted the "test of time". Take Doyle and Harrington for an example, or even Billy Baxter(just won 2 prelims at last WPT) many, many many, of these players are still very active and still cash/win majors live. Remember Hellmuth won his first in 89'....... 8 years before Stu won his 3rd.

 Money had a very different meaning to him than it does to the rest of us.  And consider this...when you have $500 in chips in front of you at a casino table, doesnt it feel different than if you have $500 in your checking account?

The WSOP where he cracked out and blinded out in 9th he probably wouldve won...the others dont count (he didnt show up but he wouldve won if he had?  come on...) 

legend has it stuey liked to have a look at the cards...and jm from time to time