He is purely one of the better players in the world. When you have the kind of combination of skill that he has with pure Mathematical ability and instincts of hand ranges of his opponents you can get away with playing more hands than your average player.

If you ever pay close attention to him during a full tourny he plays relativly tight early on. The only times he gets a little wreckless is during the money bubbles and short handed. He has enough money, not there for that only winning.

__________________
Kickboyswoop

Are you ready to chime in Jason? what is your opinion on Gus Hansen?

Poker Pro or Lucky Maniac?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Gus Hansen isn't a top pro and is more of an action maniac. There is some brilliance to his play, but it is overshadowed by his propensity to gamble and action up.

This might seem like sour grapes to some because I haven't ever won a big tournament or played on High Stakes Poker. I know the consensus is that he is a world class poker player because he has won a lot of cash in tournaments and has a very good TV presence and profile.

A few things you might not know about Gus, just a few months ago he was broke as could be (actually worse than broke, because he owed a bundle) and didn't have a pot to piss in. He has won millions and went broke several times. (more on this later)

Here is my analysis of Gus:


Positive Points:

• Extremely good at reading players and analyzing their likely hand ranges, and using aggression to push players off of pots.
• Aggression - This one element even at lower limit games by bad players can make up for a lot of mistakes. Gus is definitely aggressive and this pure aggression factor covers up a lot of mistakes and flaws in his game.
• Ability to stay in Action - Because of his high profile and past record of winning tournaments Gus is able to "Stay in Action" by borrowing money when he goes broke and by having "Backers". Backers are people who put people into tournaments for a % of the win.

Negative Points:

• Propensity to Gamble. You just can't be a winner in the long run when you constantly take the worst of it and gamble up to much. There is a perfect example of this in the poker video section - Gus Hansen - Extremely Loose All in Call. . There is just no way that anyone with half a brain can think this is a good play. Watch the video. It's not like he made a bad read and moved all in and got called. He is the donkey calling off a ton more chips with ten high preflop. This isn't an isolated incident, Gus makes a lot of bad plays like this.
• Bankroll Management - How can you win so much money and be broke?? Only one reason (OK, maybe more) Playing to high for your bankroll and ego come to mind.
• Debts - Similar to bankroll management, but slightly different. The word in Vegas is that even after his big score with the 2nd place finish in WPT Championship, it just barely got him out of the hole with the money he owed. Thats pretty bad, when you win 2 million and don't get much.

To me, the top pros are the guys with the most money, and the ones that hang onto it. The best players in the world love to see Gus in action and winning tournaments because they know he will most likely lose it in the high stakes games.

Just because you've won 5 million or whatever doesn't make you a great player, especially if you've lost it all, it just makes you a gambler. Personally, I'd rather be a poker player with a moderate amount of money than a gambler who is constantly broke.

Let the flaming and discussion continue.

Jason

__________________
I'm Not Lucky, I Have Good Karma !

I voted the same karma. Although he has won millions in tourneys I can only imagine what he dumps in the side games! Tourneys are a good gauge of short term luck, not long term skill, and although Gus is a big name in poker I don't put him in the same group as Negraneau, the Brunsons, Harman etc... Whenever I see the name "Gus Hansen" I just can't help but associate his name with the terms "maniac" and "lucky" so that is why I voted like I did.

I didn't know that he was for sure broke all the time but I had a feeling.

I didn't know that hew had that much trouble with debt, but I'm not surprised. I had heard that he's lost tons on sports betting, which to me doesn't sound like what a "professional" gambler should be doing. If you really have a positive expectation in huge buy-in tournaments, why would you blow that much money betting on events that you can't even influence?

I don't know much about his financial situation and I can see your points Jason. Perhaps the coverage he gets has put him up with some of the top pros. I don't think he is a "Top Pro" of the calibre of Daniel Negreanu, Doyle Brunson, Phil Hellmuth, etc., but I think he is a lot better than just an action maniac that gets lucky.

__________________
~PokerDawg~
Poker Blog

I voted that I consider him a "top pro".


Although, like the rest of us he's human and so my opinion is that brilliant though he may be, he's got flaws and when it comes to Gus Hansen, it's obvious that when he makes a mistake, it'll be through excessive aggression.

So some of his aggression is a fault, some is brilliance. With the kind of attitude that meets most situations (at least on the card table) with aggression, you are going to see huge fluctuations in his bankroll.

My personal belief is that you don't do what he's done without being damn good at what you do and so I'd expect him overall make more money than he loses. I am not certain of that, it's just an educated guess because it all comes down to whether or not he can keep his aggressive mindset in check, and still listen to it enough to make the big bucks.

I hadn't fully read your post, GoodKarmaKid, when I made my previous post.

You make a good point in saying:
I agree, if you consider poker to be at the table as well as away from it. His performance has been poor (if what you say about his debts is accurate).

I'm a little more narrow sighted though; when he's at the table he's one of the best.

I would have to say that Hansen is a top pro, but then again, all most of us really know about him is what we see on TV. From that standpoint, he plays exceptional "on the edge" poker. What most of us don't know about is his (or any other pro) real $$$ situation or losses on the side games, side bets, etc. Knowing the factual financial information of any of the pros could easily change the way in which we look at them.

How one can become a professional poker player at the highest level and piss their money away to the point of being broke, I cannot understand. I suppose it is the proverbial story of the lotto winner who turns around and loses everything. I can only wish to get the chance to be in their shoes.

__________________
ertrauma


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As my father always said, "Son, choose your sword wisely for some day you may find you must fall on it".

The simple version is: Those who are willing to risk the most are also the most likely to win the most, and conversely lose the most. ala the "Gus Hansen Effect"

You and I are much less likely to ever play in the highest stakes games in town because we are less willing to risk our entire financial future on a couple sessions of poker.

Having said that, I think I am going to gamble up this world series and just go on a monster parlay run, starting with 100-200 limit holdem, win a few session, and play higher, see if I can't win 300-400k in a month or so (we'll see if I have the balls to follow through)

Jason

__________________
I'm Not Lucky, I Have Good Karma !