Poker world argues if Phil Hellmuth is good at poker, again
The oldest argument in the modern game ignited again this week after Phil Galfond dared to say something nice about another player.
Is Phil Hellmuth, the player with the most World Series of Poker bracelets, a great player? It's odd that a player with such an accolade is even subject to a debate, but we have argued about it forever and we are doing it again (after all it is not like there is anything else newsworthy happening in poker right now).
Phil Galfond made the mistake of praising the Poker Brat after a recent performance on PokerGO:
We so often criticize the plays we see on TV from the comfort of our couches. I think it’s only fair to also give credit where credit is due.
I recently watched @phil_hellmuth on @PokerGO’s #HighStakesDuel & wrote down some thoughts. pic.twitter.com/AEOVEeczZQ
— Phil Galfond (@PhilGalfond) October 7, 2020
Little did he realise he would face the wrath of the Hellmuth haters. Most of whom wanted to question the ability of Phil, some of them (most notably Olivier Busquet) taking the opportunity to take shots at Hellmuth's flawed ambassadorial qualities:
He punted every 300k I’ve seen him play in so I don’t share your view 🙃 I think he’s a clear losing player in tougher lineups and mostly plays a style that exploits vs. tighter weaker opponents and WSOP & oldschool player tendencies.
I find it entertaining to play against him.— Fedor Holz (@CrownUpGuy) October 7, 2020
On your side of the argument, people have some nice things to say. The people on the other side of the argument are willing to bet *really* big.
Hmm.... 🤔 https://t.co/FwJDv4SStk
— Dan Smith (@DanSmithHolla) October 7, 2020
Easily 1 of the silliest things I’ve ever read from someone I respect. Misses the point or is flat out wrong on almost every substantive issue and an actual formal apology to the most obnoxious disrespectful, self promoting ego maniac in the industry. It’s like Stockholm syndrome
— Olivier Busquet (@olivierbusquet) October 7, 2020
It was enough pushback that Galfond felt the need to qualify his statements about Phil:
#2 was part of the premise of my post - The elite online poker community has criticized PH’s play for over a decade.
#1 is an opinion I understand but don’t hold.
In both cases, it feels like an “agree to disagree” situation?
I respect both arguments - I used to believe #2.
— Phil Galfond (@PhilGalfond) October 8, 2020
Phil himself seemed hurt that Fedor Holz would be so critical, reminding him of his 15 bracelets on Instagram as a way of proving his poker chops:
And of course it would not be poker if there wasn't a heads-up match proposed to settle the debate:
I anticipated there being many responses to this tweet critical of my personal play so let me put my money (and yours) where my mouth is. Since we’re doing things formally now, I formally challenge @phil_hellmuth to a HU match.
— Olivier Busquet (@olivierbusquet) October 7, 2020
In case you are wondering about the match that Galfond was referring to that ignited this debate, it was this one:
The debate itself is nothing new and is as old as the related 'live vs online' player argument. Hellmuth does not have a strong technical game and probably could not even define GTO let alone explain what a solver does. But he does have a unique ability to read people and adapt in a live setting, in particular he seems talented at exploiting amateur players and use his table image in ways others can't.
It's probably quite a fruitless endeavour to debate it further, but see you same time next year when we will probably be doing just that.
Is Phil the greatest? Let us know in the comments:
