Stu Ungar v Waller02

Jac35

I’ve been watching Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes again

So let’s go back in poker time to 1980
The Wsop main event has 73 runners and was won by Stu Ungar when he beat Doyle Brunson when heads up

With what we know about poker now
Would any decent winning mtt player on Sky who studies hard be the best player in the field?

Would the best players of the time begin to make good adjustments?
Would the good winning player from now have to make many adjustments to their game?

Itsover4u

I would say pretty much 100% they would be the best in the field. In 2005 beating 10/20 was the equivalent of beat 0.25/50 now

waller02

5p an hour was a lot of money in 1980

It's an interesting question though. I've never really seen any poker pre 2008 so I haven't got a clue.

Jac35

waller02 said:

5p an hour was a lot of money in 1980

It's an interesting question though. I've never really seen any poker pre 2008 so I haven't got a clue.

Watch some of the early High Stakes poker shows?
The players that we saw as gods at the time make some horrendous plays

waller02

Jac35 said:

waller02 said:

5p an hour was a lot of money in 1980

It's an interesting question though. I've never really seen any poker pre 2008 so I haven't got a clue.

Watch some of the early High Stakes poker shows?
The players that we saw as gods at the time make some horrendous plays

I guess if a winning reg could go back in time to 1980 then yeah. But on the flip side, a top 80s player should still be world class player today with a bit of work.

You could ask the same question on a number of games/sports. Would George Best be any good in the modern game? Etc.

eon1961

George Best would destroy sides now since a proper tackle was outlawed.

kapowblamz

I definitely think poker was better when players looked like this



Rather than this




That said Stealthmunk would probably destroy Ungar.

Jac35

eon1961 said:

George Best would destroy sides now since a proper tackle was outlawed.

And the quality of the pitches

Allan23

In pretty much every sport in the world (including poker) the best now are miles better than anyone that existed pre 90s. Drop a Best, Pele etc in to today’s game and the speed of the game would just pass them by. Direct comparisons aren’t that useful however, especially in football - the tactics, coaching from a young age and analysis means it’s almost a different sport to “back in the day”, so would be interesting to see how good some of the previous greats would’ve been in today’s game

kapowblamz

Ye how good would Ungar be today if he had the knowledge available today at his fingertips?

stokefc

Doyle used total aggression and put people in awkward situations with lots of money in the middle his favourite hands were suited connectors today's top players have got all the information to learn and get better at the touch of a button so it's easier now than back then so long that you are prepared to put the effort in .
So I think it's reasonable to say poker players of yesteryear wouldn't cope with the players of today

jordz16

Its very tough to compare generations, in truth most elite level poker players or sports people of yesteryear would very likely struggle in todays game as what made a top player back then is very different to what makes a top player now, although there would no doubt have been some average players from the past who's skillset would totally thrive and succeed in todays game.

George Best would likely have had the type of career of someone such as Ravel Morrison or David Bentley, even the genius of Gazza might not have been given as many chances in todays world. But there would have been a load of committed yet underachieving lower league players back then who we've never heard of who could have emulated the likes of Jordan Henderson or James Milner in this era