PHIL IVEY OR STU UNGAR - Who is the Greatest Poker Player?

Phil Ivey and Stu Ungar. Recognizable names to anyone who knows anything about Poker. Two of the greatest poker minds within their own time. But just how exactly do these two players compare and contrast.
and who among these 2 poker legends is the greatest poker player of all time?
Powered by VIP-Grinders.com - Your professional online poker partner & affiliate!
Join our new Discord group ( / discord ) to get access to $8,000 in exclusive monthly freerolls and try online poker for free!
Visit www.vip-grinders.com/go/poker... for more information on our rakeback deals and services
** VISIT MY PLAYLISTS FOR MORE POKER VIDEOS **
My playlists include :
1.Poker Documentaries
2.Poker Countdowns
3.Poker Tricks
4.Poker Things You Did Not Know
Playlist link - / @pokerbounty
** SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE VIDEOS **
kzbin.infoex...
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

[@PokerBounty]

Learn more about our sponsor VIP-Grinders.com and how to get access to $8,000 exclusive freerolls every month here: www.vip-grinders.com/go/poker-bounty/

[@TheOfficialSlingRaw]

Anyone who honestly believes Phil Ivey is the better player is delusional. Stu Ungar played Texas Hold’em for the very first time in his life at the 1980 WSOP main event and won. Let that sink in.

[@stevest8675]

Stu Ungar would demolish Ivey.

[@eaglewinnings8003]

..... With a field of like 10 tables. Ivey is the better player. Not only has he mastered live poker but hes also one of the biggest winners all time when it comes to playing online. Ungar is better than all of his contemporaries though

[@bryantaylor9874]

@@eaglewinnings8003 What? Each one of those tables was filled with killers and Ungar had never played hold em before in his life. Ungar didn't have the greatest pro career of all time, but beyond a doubt he was the greatest player there's ever been.

[@eaglewinnings8003]

@@bryantaylor9874 you clearly know nothing about poker.

[@casimirnoga4719]

Ungars first event was Amarillo slims Super Bowl of poker and he busted out early, the wsop was his second but still incredibly impressive, he was a savant at cards.

[@michaelstratos7803]

Legend has it they are still blinding off his stack till this day

[@Youre_Right]

Stu was a mathematical genius and had a photographic memory. There’s a story told by Chip Reese about Stu. Chip was playing a gin tournament. Stu was playing at a different table. Chip asked Stu if he should have made a certain play. Stu had remembered the card had been played earlier and said no. He memorized a deck on a table he wasn’t even playing.

[@growandgame]

At the top of each players game, I gotta give it to Stu. He got into poker because nobody would play him at gin . , Then he proceeds to win 3 wsop bracelets. The guy was a phenom.

[@Aaeie]

Stu was way ahead of his time and had a mind like no other

[@obamacare9470]

@@Aaeie his mind couldn't be that great if he went broke..

[@michaelss1294]

Agree. Ungar would destroy Ivey.

[@StuUngar]

I give it to Ivey. Stuey was known as a break even player at best in cash games. Whether it’s 9-handed, short handed, heads up, limit, no limit, omaha, 2-7, hold em, you name it….you see Ivey sitting across from you, your money is as good as gone

[@gunslinger1665]

@@StuUngar well that bullshit lol ivey hasn't won a wsop. He's the best cash player tho but not heads up or tournament.

[@maromorostar6621]

Honey he made a video about the greatest poker player and I'm not in it. 🤬

[@servesyourightformuscat1219]

Fucking queen ten

[@MikEEEB32]

Bahaha great comment!

[@doubleM1986]

Shut up Phil Hellmuth

[@MemberWhen]

I know, he’s some internet guy

[@samets3622]

He is from Florida, or some place stupid.

[@JetEngine85]

Both great both legends.,but if I had to choose only 1..I'd pick stu

[@badabing6474]

You can’t compare Ungar with Ivey.It’s like night & day.Ungar is the best gin rummy & poker player of all time.Phil HELLMUTH is in his range of greatness.Seeing as he has the most hardware bracelets to back it up.

[@michaelss1294]

Exactly

[@adyajlp]

Omg hellmuth is nowhere near Ungar

[@mattolivier1835]

No, Hellmuth isn't even close to Ungar. You obviously don't know anything about poker. Go read some books little boy and come back with some knowledge.

[@GFYM_Finance]

Stu was a tournament wizard. Ivey is the cash game GOAT. They're styles would clash if they met in each other's main games of strengths, but would still be a joy to watch.

[@dailygiftsforever]

No comparison... all good poker players would 100% say Stu Ungar... including Phil Ivey himself. Rest in peace Stu, you are loved.

[@ronaldbarnes1746]

Its actually the only comparison out there that is close. Iys like Lebron vs Jordan. Most onow Jordan is the best. But lebron the only one that came close.

[@bryantaylor9874]

If the category was better professional or who'd you rather stake, it's Ivey obviously, but that wasn't the question. If you ask who's the better poker player the answers Ungar without any hesitation. Nothing against Ivey but Ungar was the greatest poker player ever and its that simple. Ungar was probably the greatest card player ever too. Anybody you compare him to is by definition in second place.

[@ironmonkey1512]

No doubt, it's impossible to imagine what Stu would be capable of with a clear and sober head.

[@bryantaylor9874]

@@ironmonkey1512 I couldn't believe how many people said I was wrong. Stu was the single most naturally gifted card player (any games) ever to be born. It's a testament to how rough his personal life was that so many poker players don't know who he is.

[@mattolivier1835]

Yup, exactly.

[@adorkable81]

Just slap that round blue sunglasses on Fedor Holtz and set up Phil Ivey vs "Stu Ungur" match already

[@ericday3538]

Stu high as a kite still beats Phil. Had Stu gotten sober he'd be the undeniable GOAT with like a 100 WSOP event final tables and 20 bracelets...

[@MrDinocizmic]

Had I won a powerball I would have been a millionaire

[@lancel71]

Stu Ungar by far

[@Kevin-oc2jb]

Ivey has focus and drive. Ungar was literally a genius.

[@scottjanikowski3565]

He was NOT a genius, he was a SAVANT! There is a big difference!

[@apostasiaelegcho5612]

I'd give it to Ivey. As Doyle has said, Stu was the greatest poker tournament player but couldn't play a cash game to save his life. Ivey can do both.

[@scottjanikowski3565]

I literally watched Stuey clean up every time I saw him play a cash game!

[@apostasiaelegcho5612]

@@scottjanikowski3565 Which is why he died broke. Makes sense.

[@scottjanikowski3565]

@@apostasiaelegcho5612 He was addicted to cocaine, and spent all his money on that...HELLO!!!!????

[@mattolivier1835]

Nice try fool. Dolly NEVER said that. Wake up clown.

[@angelvalle6515]

Bet against stu if you want 😂 but im betting on him everyday twice on Sunday.

[@jimd9360]

Today's fields may have far more entrants, but BITD, almost everyone in those tournaments was a pro. Also, in terms of wins, Ungar didn't just cash in many tournaments, but WON them. By the accounts of people that knew the game in those days, he entered no more than 30 tournaments in his entire life. He won at least 10 of them, 6 of those were the top 2 tournaments of the day, IMO, Stu Ungar was the best of all time. Many top pros will tell you the same - Doyle Brunson and Mike Sexton among them.

[@davidkemp4193]

No kidding and the first time I heard how he beat a casino that put up 10k if he did it deck of cards turned over one bye one till the last card or last 2 witch he nailed 100 percent suit and number and was done with math that fast if you have not heard this story you can find it or the other one calling with 10 high on river to an all shove he new was a monster and beat the best pro at the time with that match the pro Said he just about gave up the game after that call and read tc stay safe

[@shakazulu9763]

i concur

[@somaliano99kingkonghimself75]

To us is Phil ivy all day for ever

[@johnzimmerman340]

Ungar did not blind out in 1990. He busted out as the result of play. I was there and saw him leave the final table in 9th place.

[@tenningale]

It's like Fischer vs. Kasparov. Ivey is a little bit old school and didn't grow up in the era of solvers, just like Kasparov didn't grow up in the era of chess engines. Ivey would probably beat Ungar heads up if you do 25k hands just as Kasparov would've probably beaten Fischer because of the knowledge of chess that was gained over time. Though Ungar and Fischer might have the argument that they were more naturally talented.

[@acepaul407]

What wasn't mentioned is that Stu also won the Superbowl of Poker 3 times. He is the only player to win both the World Series AND the Superbowl of poker. At the table, my money would be on Stuey. As a professional gambler, Phil Ivey is the guy.

[@mattolivier1835]

The question was who was better. Wake up fool! Ungar was better than little Ivey. Don't cry.

[@todayIfoundthis]

Give me Stu at Black Jack, NL Hold’em, and Gin. I will take Ivey overall and in everything else.

[@stacking4life86]

0 drugs and women involved its stuey and its probably not close add in everything called life and Ivey gets the nod for genius poker player with the most consistency. Ivey would NOT beat him at Gin = 0% Chance

[@martincarlberg9671]

Stu would just adopt the field til i matters, masterminds, then its open war, 500 left. I think he could win or at least been in the last 100?

[@nolanbodner3278]

please don't sleep on Phil Hellmuth...

[@rabsme9767]

Stu was so skilled and also he crushed literally souls. If you have to beat someone head’s up , there is no discussion. Stu is the man.But nowadays everything is different. Lets put aside side bets and sports bets. I think that Stu ungar’s main skill was to put pressure on opponent and reading abilities. So he put a lot of ego in his game to make people play off their game and sometimes it backfires when he spit at dealers and smash cards.if you play the Germans and the Russians , I don’t think they will change their GTO approach even against a crazy Stu.The best players in any format nowadays are so composed and so skilled, I think frustration would have been an huge issue for him. Phil On the other side is good in every format of poker AND he work his game and he’s always composed. For me its like comparing 2 worlds of poker. The before and after internet is that simple.They were the best in their era but Phil might have the slight edge in my opinion. It Would have been so great to see the durr challenge versus Stu ...Or Stu in high stakes poker...

[@gheffz]

Stu

[@captainbluegill3357]

Stu was the bobby fisher of poker best talent ever but not right in the head

[@scrubfive9239]

Stu Ungar played during a time where the average "poker pro" was pretty damn terrible. Back in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's, all you needed to do to be one of the top dogs was simply play Tight and Agressive vs this loose players and loosen up your range a bit vs the tight, passive players. Even in modern day poker, just employing these simple strategies and playing in position is all you need to beat most $1/2, $2/5 and even a good amount of $5/10 games. Stu had natural talent but his drug and gambling addictions were his downfall. Ivey on the other hand, was also a natural at poker but he also put in the work and volume on top of that. Also, the tournament fields were extremely small in the 80s and 90's. Stu won in 81' '82 and '97 in which the amount of players were 73, 75 and 312 respectively. Tiny, tiny fields. The only way this would even be a serious discussion would be a hypothetical scenario in which Stu Ungar was alive, had no bad drug addictions holding him back and put in the volume and work to constantly improve as a poker player. Natural Talent only takes you so far, this is why there are many names and faces that you don't see anymore who were winning players back in the early 2000's, the ones that had the natural proclevity for poker but never continued to put in the work and evolve with the game. TLDR: Phil Ivey is the better player and definitely one of the greatest and strong arguments can be made for THE greatest player of all time. This being said, Stu Ungar was and always will be a Legend of Poker and his story was quite fascinating.

[@thakurv1]

Chip Reese chooses Ivey. That means a lot. Phil Ivey is a much better folder

[@garymorgan1356]

CHIP WAS BETTER THEN DOYLE I DEALT TO BOTH HE WAS JUST BEHIND STU AND GUESS WHO WAS NUMBER THREE NOT DOYLE IT WAS BOBBY BALDWIN

[@09Germ]

With Stu reads on cards I would have to go with Stu any day in his prime.

[@davidbradley6122]

Unger was found on the 3rd day of the tournament OD...not 2nd

[@eaglewinnings8003]

Impossible to say but I'd give Ivey the edge. This isn't bad just on recency bias. Ivey is over 15 years younger. After Chris Moneymaker's win the game changed. Ivey has always shown a willingness to be adaptatative. Ungar did. With that being said I think Ungar would've had more success on High Stakes Poker and Poker After Dark than his contemporaries like Doyle, Farha, Deeb, Ferguson etc. Cautionary tale of how gambling can take your life from you

[@rdchannel4324]

Respect to Stu but Phil Ivey is "The Man"!

[@mattolivier1835]

And you're "The Woman". Wake up little bish. Stu was WAY better than little Ivey. Don't cry fool.

[@hybridnation5860]

Ivey all day. 🐐

[@FreshPotatoes1116428]

Should have taken into fact that Stu only entered about 30 major tournaments altogether…and he won 10, with 3 being the main event bracelet and two bracelets in other games. Stu would win no doubt…especially in his prime. Plus he won his 3rd main event after A 16 year time off of poker👍🏼👍🏼🕴🏼

[@TheBigIntellectual]

I think Stu is the best ever and a True gambler it's a sad story, Ivey is amazing but Stu has to be the best ever

[@Ada_solo99]

All these fishes saying stu is best, that time poker was easy. 😂 today is hard with maths and theory’s

[@ronaldbarnes1746]

I would say stu is better poker player hand for hand. But if they played heads up for a year ivey wins due to his discipline.

[@thakurv1]

Who cares about total tournament earnings. What about buy in ? Cash game ?

[@aceofspades4948]

but you talking 3mill 35 years ago

[@sleong]

Stu Ungar

[@darren4635]

why are you comparing resumes of Unger when he died relatively early in his career? And also haven't factored in inflation of the USD .

[@scottjanikowski3565]

Get serious! It's not even close!

[@thelasvegaskid]

Ungar would beat him everyday and twice on Sunday! Stu is a special player.

[@ronaldbarnes1746]

Unfar definetely had a faster thought process. For him tanking means 30 seconds. Ungar has more raw gamble. Ivey looking for an edge. Ungar consistently more agressive. Most cash players of that era say Chip Reese was the best.

[@garymorgan1356]

HE WAS RIGHT BEHIND STU AND IN FRONT OF BOBBY BALDWIN I KNOW I DEALT TO ALL OF THEM INCLUDING DOYLE

[@alirioandresbustamanteampu3067]

Por qué pones un título en Español Si todo está en Inglés? Por lo menos coloca subtítulos.

[@brandonjerue1205]

STU WON WSOP IN 1980 81 AND 26 YEARS LATER IN 1997!! Stu had to borrow the money in 97 just to get in, he wasn't a baller but one bell of a gambler, his daughter Stephanie is AWESOME! go watch her interviews

[@mattolivier1835]

We know the story little man. Stu was the best of all time. Wake up clown! Go study some history.

[@greatwhite3676]

Not really a good comparison when Stu payed the game was vastly different. As a pure poker player I would say Ivey. Card talent I say Stu. Stu was a monster Gin Rummy player. I would assume a a great bridge, pinochle, and hearts player too. Different times different people. Poker is very analytical now i'm sure Stu would have been able to adapt. But he liked doing blow and betting horses which will make you go broke.

[@dariomladenovski6481]

when Stu played the game the fields were smaller but it was played mostly by pros, these days the fields are huge but it's mostly fish

[@JayAllenification]

Stu is barely an all time top 10 player. Fans rate him but poker pros don’t have him as top 5 player of all time.

[@martincarlberg9671]

Like Ali vs. Tyson in their prime. But not.

[@chrisluehr2503]

the kid

[@eaglewinnings8003]

You don't even answer your own question. Of course Ivey has better money management so he would have more lifetime success (he's had virtually more financial poker success than anyone in the world). Ungar's bankroll management was so bad that he won 3 WORLD SERIES MAIN EVENT bracelets and died with $800 in his pocket blowing most of the money he had earned by getting staked in the '97 ME being found dead in a $24 a day budget motel. Does that mean a $1/$3 player who makes a living grinding out playing heavy hours is a better player than Ungar? Obviously not.

[@imilliemedina666]

Ivey is still alive so that settles the debate

[@user-mn8lm8bc8b]

TOUGH ONE

[@j-murphy1013]

If they both had unlimted bankrolls, Ungar wins, If not Ivey Wins. Easy.

[@jayfromaz]

The tournament's back then were very small. Players didn't have the computers and played far more passively than they do today. Stu unger's last world series of poker bracelet was against a little over 300 players. And that was the biggest WSOP tournament to date.

[@BuckeyeNut123]

Stu Ungar.

[@garyclarke9557]

The greatest tournament player of all time is Phil Hellmuth jr.

[@luu5369]

He has not won any SHR series. Chidwick is better

[@thomasdunstan7489]

This is a good clip but you can’t decide witch is better because one is a live an one is dead can’t compare it but it’s a good debate

[@Pokarface7]

They are only the best "popular" poker players. There's a lot of unknown players that are better. Just like Daniel Negreanu is the most popular player, but he can't stand on his own in high stakes cash games or heads-up. I don't want to be that guy, but Sebastien "Seb86" Sabic and Alexandre Luneau would constantly take on Ivey and other recognized poker players online. As seen in the documentary, Nosebleed.

[@TheGreatTraeX]

Ungar is the better player but Ivey is the better gambler

[@garygarcea2690]

In 1971 then after mastered all car games such as gin casino 7 card stud pinnacle all other types of gambling I grew up with Stu we were best friends no doubt Stu was the greatest by far

[@Hedonism96]

Stu was my dad

[@AnnaKuznetzova88]

Isn't phil in huge debt tho? I thought his whole winnings got seized lately

[@adorkable81]

Not in debt. I think you were referring to his Bottega winning money got seize due to legal battle.

[@michaelss1294]

Ivey is overrated

[@tonystarks7715]

@@michaelss1294 I guarantee his bank account says otherwise

[@garygarcea2690]

Stu ungar

[@somaliano99kingkonghimself75]

Phil ivy is the real king of poker of all time. Phil is more skilled in eney situations belief that you fan. Nothing. More no one reads poeple like phill get Auth of hier. no one is lije. Phill come one man

[@ubermikesocal]

Stu Ungar, without a doubt. Stu was capable of beating anyone and everyone, well before any poker strategy books, the internet to review how to guides, player tracking software, and other forms of advantages. Phil Ivey is a great player, one of the best of all time. Stu Ungar is THE best of all time.

[@_Coffee4Closers]

Yes for his day he was a good poker player... but the key here is "for his day". GTO thinking did not even exist in those days. Today he would be a middle of the pack player at best, and his lousy roll management would keep out of the biggest games. There are lots of pros today that would crush Stu Ungar. I think if Ivey and Ungar could play a series of games say 100000 hands total Ivey would crush him in the end.

[@michaelss1294]

Agree. Stu without a doubt

[@primitiveorganism9571]

_Coffee4Closers GTO thinking isn’t even a long term profitable strategy and really never was against anyone who can play poker.. Ppl who play like that get exploited within a few hrs..

[@primitiveorganism9571]

Killingsley Johnsok uh no it was ruined by drugs not fueled by them. He started playing gin rummy at like 10yrs old and was beating pros by the age of 14! Have facts before you comment like you know..

[@ironmonkey1512]

@@_Coffee4Closers stu was a genius, read his wikipedia page or biography. He would have easily adapted.

[@shakazulu9763]

stu is the best. period. phil is a cheat.

[@jbpokerwar8962]

Lol phil Ivey is great, it's a tie

[@MrDinocizmic]

Not sure how Stu can be considered best ever when he spent half of his life broke and owing people money. He even died broke in a dingy Vegas hotel room. Bankroll management is huge part of the game. I can see someone claiming Stu is the best off of pure skills and instincts but overall not even close. If I’m putting my last $100 on one of them it is 100 percent going on Ivey. Stu would probably showed up high as a kite anyways

[@Joe-ew2rt]

High as a kite wrecking everyone Stu is better

[@JokersRWildStudios]

Stu is the greatest player of the 20th century. But guys like Ivey and Negreanu are better.

[@getsomeorgohome]

Stu was better for sure

[@jayfromaz]

today's players as a rule are far more skilled than younger State. A lot of that is because of Internet poker a man gain a great deal of experience quickly. Also computer analysis which can run millions of hands and scenarios. The fields are much larger. There is far more research into the field and there was and Stu Ungar's day. Players are far more aggressive today. A lot like Unger was in his day memorizing cards would be great for seven card stud but not necessarily for Texas hold'em.I would go with Ivey.

[@acepaul407]

You are totally wrong. 100% wrong. Stuey's greatest strength is figuring people out and exploiting their weaknesses. He knew how to intimidate people and hurt people. He would have crushed the internet players without any problems, because when it came to figuring out people. Stuey was a master at it.

[@jayfromaz]

@@acepaul407 you also have to remember back then the world series of poker was only a couple hundred players. Also he pioneered aggressive play. He was great in his day. And probably would do very well today. Picture also dealing with people that have used computer analysis to dictate their play and they're very strong students of the game now and in the past. Besides that I've seen videos of his play. He's good but in today's world it's a totally different environment. I'm a big fan of his play.

[@wildestcowboy2668]

Stu was better, trust me....

[@rjmacready9828]

Ivey all day. Phil is the GOAT

[@mathewphelps9933]

I hate drugs.

[@aceofspades4948]

gotta say smoking weed seems to good for poker

[@LL-ks7iy]

Phil Ivey

[@llcoolmartine]

Phil Ivey is the Greatest of those 2. Since Stu Ungar is dead...

[@cedhabs20]

Ivey have an advantage that Stu Ungar doesn't, Today's technology. Stu Ungar learn everything by himself...making a line of Cocaïne. I really believe that he would be at the top in today's era if he could see video and even more, if he had access to computer.

[@chokoon21]

two words . . PHIL HELLMUTH . . . . . jk lol.

[@vambo13257]

Unger without a doubt, to win 3 main events and so far apart.

[@kobe3534]

back then there were only 100+ players now theres more than a thousand and Johny Chan has won 2 straight main event in 1987-88 and could've won 3 if he win heads up against hellmuth

[@acepaul407]

@@kobe3534 Doesn't matter. Stuey would have crushed all comers. The size of the field is irrelevant. He was a master of reading people, nobody else has come close.

[@RyanC3ONE3]

It’s not even close... both are greats but Stu is best of all time

[@michaelss1294]

Agree

[@Chris-en2ok]

Chip Reese.

[@deangoings]

Um, stu became broke. Ivy is etill a multi millionaire. Theres no comparison.

[@s.k.9059]

Stu Ungar hands down.

[@stevest8675]

Stu Ungar

[@brandonnel4687]

Ha ha ,Phill Ivey isn't even close to being number one. Jonny Moss has more WSOP main events won while Ivey has none .Doyle Brunson has two main events WSOP that beats Ivey again as he has zero and stu is the greatest in history no doubt

[@Mr.paint123]

Did you ever heard of Stu Ungar cheating ??? I know Phil has been accused on a few times Winner - Stu Ungar

[@daithi1966]

My vote is for Phil Ivey --- or my name would be revoked.

[@getsomeorgohome]

Phil doesn't have 100 million 😅

[@timyoung4039]

This is like the Tiger vs Jack argument. Sure stu has 3 main event bracelets. But those came in fields of how many players? No more then 150 I believe? Also consider the competition. The players that Ivey is facing is far superior. Bottom line is this… Tiger is the GOAT and his records will not be broken for quite some time if ever. Ivey is in the same boat.

[@PokerBounty]

good analogy

[@XZOL445]

Tiger is the GOAT? How? And how can you say his records will not be broken? He doesn't even have the most majors! Jack has 18 and Tiger has 15. And that's most likely all Tiger is going to get. Phil has ZERO Main Event wins. Stu has 3, and 3 Super Bowl of poker wins. Nobody else has even won them both once. And who cares about the size of the fields? If Stu was sitting down with all these clown online qualifiers it would basically just be free chips for him.

[@dariomladenovski6481]

yeah except for when Stu played the game the fields were smaller but the games were played by pros, when Ivey was in his prime the fields were huge but the players were mostly fish

[@michaelss1294]

Ivey is overrated. In 2014, Ivey is the second biggest loser in online poker. In 2015, Ivey is the biggest LOSER in online poker. Nowadays, top poker players run circle on Ivey. Stu ungar would beat Ivey.

[@XxMr1XxX]

The entire comparison is totally nonesense. Back at the time Stu was crushing for sure, because players were super tight and had no idea how to play the game back then. When Ivey was hyped there were millions of players who just started playing poker and also had no idea how to play the game. Why is Johnny Chan not on the list? A guy who managed to reach the Heads Up of the WSOP Main Event 3 times in a row? Because he isnt even considered a good player anymore, because he isnt even a winning player anymore. The fields were small back then and Poker back then wasnt much competetive. Saying one of those guys is "The best of all time" is just bs. There are at least 10 000 players on this planet who are way better than them and had much more success then them in a much more competetive environement. The comparision should be "Who is the most popular poker player of all time". Everyone who thinks that one of these two is the "best of all time" has never played competetive Poker online and is influenced by the hype around these two guys. Phil Ivey for example is down millions on Pokerstars, because he wasnt a winning player at the stakes he was playing. Online Poker has players who dont try to be famous but who had way way more success than both of them. For example "veeea" a guy who managed to win the Sunday Million on Pokerstars 3 times and made a total of 5 final table appearances and a lot more. To just name one guy. And almost no one knows who he is. Or people who crush highstakes cash game for years like for example Trueteller who was able to change his playstyle and adapt for over a decade to stay amoung the best cash game players in the world in an extremely competetive environment. So once again these comparisons are completely pointless if you dont include players from the past ~15 years and only include players who were successful before the poker boom.

[@sahilthakur5053]

yea man so true. do u play at poker stars ?

[@GRice999]

To be considered great today, one needs to be great at tournaments, in ring games, short handed, online tournaments, online cash games, and in a number of different games. If Ivey was down $Millions at Stars but up twice that much on other sites, then his overall results are what defines him. He's certainly one of the greatest. And don't put all your eggs in online results, because there was, and still is, cheating going on that's hard to detect, so results can be skewed. But yes, Stu Ungar, lol.

[@XxMr1XxX]

@@GRice999 Dont get me wrong, but when Ivey made millions with poker the competition was very bad. There is a reason why highstakes regulars consider him a bad player at highstakes. Hes down ~3 million on pokerstars. You overestimate him by a lot. Also live poker is way way easier than online. A 1k$ Buy-In tournament is as soft as a $100 tournament online. Most people are blinded by the fame of some people, but the truth is Ivey isnt a winning player anymore. He was a winning player for like 15 years. Just face the truth. Its dumb to call one player the best of all time when >10k people in the world are better than him. You just look at his fame and his all time winnings, but not at his buy ins and that he fires multiple bullets in highstakes mtts without even cashing. Its the same with Phil Hellmouth, Daniel Negreanu and all those other Poker players who try to fame hunt.

[@alllivesmatter3561]

@@XxMr1XxX 🤡🤡🤡.

[@lukebruce5234]

@@XxMr1XxX Yeah back then everyone was trash but it's also extremely hard to study poker without a computer. Since Stu was a genius he was like 10 levels above everyone else. He was Bobby Fisher level of talent.

[@martincarlberg9671]

Stu, Ivey, Stu, Ivey, then they just become pals. But in real life, Stu would be the winner, why... Stu loved to beat a pear....

[@Mr.paint123]

3x world champ !!! Back to back and then more then a DECADE and a half later Stu comes back and wins the main event one more time It’s STU UNGAR all the way !!

[@lesser_spotted_shitstain]

Stu a fishy on a little dishy. Weak player. Ivy pissant. Me greatest

[@Mr.paint123]

@@lesser_spotted_shitstain 3 wsop main event bracelets Vs Zero

[@michaelss1294]

Goat ungar

[@lesser_spotted_shitstain]

@@michaelss1294 I got a goat stuck up my arse

[@lesser_spotted_shitstain]

Il bite ungars head off

[@martincarlberg9671]

Stu as his best = Mike Tyson as his best, that said no one had a chanse, BUT both sports advance so....?❤️

[@spectreshot8536]

I give it to Phil. He has stood the test of time, not needed to be permanently bailed out, even with his gambling lifestyle. He Has played vastly larger tournament fields, consistently played higher stakes and think that needs to be taken into account. You can be amazing at everything, but if you are completely deficient in being able to live life.. could Stu maybe beat Phil at Hold em? Maybe so. Stu just never had the ability to stand the test of time. Phil is all around better. Life, poker.. Phil is the winner from now until the end of time.

[@eternalselph]

I'll take the guy with the darker skin and curly hair. They're usually the best at everything

[@flelite3994]

lol what you mean

[@tflo75]

wrong Phil.....Hellmuth uses white magic and he can dodge bullets.

[@paulnolife6519]

Cmon dont compare the lengedary 3 times wsop winner to anyother poker player cus he was above and beyond anyone i study his playstyle since 15 years ago and i have a hard time losing in any poker table tournament that i enter its almost unfair to play against me because i found a way to mimic stu playstyle and i understand why he was the best cus of his playstyle.

[@wurmtron]

sure champ

[@moneyindabank]

Ungar is the greatest because he’s white.