WSOP - Harrington

[HPG ADMIN]

Scenario: Dan Haarrington makes it to the final table this year. That means he finished 4th in 2004, 3rd in 2003, and the final table in 2005. Would you consider that to be the greater accomplishment in poker history given the field sizes?

[BlackHawk]

Without a doubt, I think that would surpass Stu Ungar's 3 WSOP victories.

Dont' forget he won the big one too in 95 I think.

[Iceman37]

Dan Harrington is probably the most underrated player in the game, though it's finally dawning on people just what he's accomplished. But I don't think it's the absolute most spectacular thing in the history of the game or the series. Two things bother me...first, that he doesn't seem to have the "ultimate killer instinct" of a Daniel Negreanu, Phil Ivey or even Layne Flack. I think he's a masterful tight/aggressive player who gets to the final table the old fashioned way (by just playing solid, fundamental poker and letting everyone else's mistakes propel him along). I'm just not convinced that when he needs to become the hunter rather than the gatherer, he has the chops to do that. I could be wrong, and frankly I hope that I am because I do admire him as a player.

The other thing that bothers me is that we'll never know just how good Stu Ungar really could have been, or what else he could have accomplished even in today's environment. For that reason, it's going to be hard to trump what he DID accomplish, in my book. I also believe that while the sheer numbers of participants has grown dramatically, the quality of player has decreased just as dramatically...so Stu won when poker players were poker players and not Gus Hansen/Chris Moneymaker/Mattias Andersen types.

I kind of agree with Iceman but I would argue that Harrington does have the killer instinct. We haven't seen him play very much, but I have seen him make very few mistakes. It seems when hes beat he either lays it down or makes the other guy fold. We all saw the play he made in 2004 against Arieh and Raymer where he raised 1.3 million with nothing. That's killer instinct, to put about half his chips on the line with the way Raymer was calling everything reveals something about his game. That's why we see him at the final table so much, he plays solid poker and he does have killer instinct. I really don't think any other player has an understanding of tournament play then he does. After reading hias book, I realize the thinking he goes through every hand. And I do agree that he is the most underrated player of all time. In my opinion, Stu Ungar's feat was the greatest thing ever in poker, but I think if Dan Harrington makes it the final table again than that will be.

Listen, Harrington's run is incredible, just making it back to the final table in today's age is impressive, but until I hear about Harrington playing in the tourney and doing well the morning after an all-night booze-filled bender at the Cheetah Club all coked up on Meth, then he ain't as good as Unger.

RIP Stuey, you were the best, on and off the felt.
Buy a hooker in his honor. Do one for Stuey.

[deekay140]

Most of these pros have been playing each other for so long, they know the ins and outs of one another. It takes some serious skill and good cards to get to the final table with the size of the current fields. I would imagine that there isnt a single guy at the final table that didnt outdraw at least one time to get there. Dan is a great player and seems to adjust well to the less experienced players. Imho, this is the mark of a true champion. weeding your way through 2600 players to make the final table again is a major accomplishment, if he did it again this year (probably with 5000 people entered) I would have to say that takes the cake for accomplishments in my book. We all know it only takes one hand to go bust, and not getting outdrawn or outplayed with these size fields is incredible.