Talk:Phil Hellmuth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
This article is part of WikiProject Poker, an attempt at building a useful poker resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page.

this is just my personal opinion... but i hate him.... hey, take off those sunglasses.... can't control your eyes eh? you got lucky when you beat Chan in 1989. Dude, i hope you read this, i would destroy you at the poker table. www.djbryson.com


Oops... this should be at Phil Hellmuth, Jr. (with the comma), but the existing redirect is in the way. - Furrykef 07:24, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Convention is to use the most common name, and this is the most common name. No other articles are in the way, so the article should stay at Phil Hellmuth. CryptoDerk 07:28, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

But common on what grounds? In everyday conversation, his name will likely be shortened to just "Phil Hellmuth", but if we consider only professional and/or reputable publications, we might well see "Phil Hellmuth, Jr." used more often. If we just go by Google, well, "Phil Hellmuth" wins, but Google doesn't answer that question. - Furrykef 09:04, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Right, this isn't an easy question for google to answer. However, from my experience watching televised poker shows he is rarely called "Junior" except in the context of his father. His author name on many websites, such as amazon.com, is "Phil Hellmuth", and on his official website philhellmuth.com, his name is written as "Phil Hellmuth" on all graphics. Hence this is why I think "Phil Hellmuth" is the most common name. If we did have an article about his father, I could understand moving this. Hope this clears things up. CryptoDerk 15:55, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

OK, I guess that's good enough. - Furrykef 21:46, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Quick note - I changed "the color commentator" to "commentator" in regards to his position on Celebrity Poker Showdown. Dave Foley is the color commentator.

Contents

[edit] POV about Hellmuth

We should talk about the opinionated statements which creep into this article. One user from the University of Rochester seems to insist on reverting to his version of the "Personality and controversy" section, including opinionated statements such as:

  • "Love him or hate him, Hellmuth has become arguably the most marketable personality in poker" - inappropriate for the encyclopedia to say that someone is 'arguably the most' anything. 'love him or hate him' is also a throwaway phrase.
  • "he certainly has the hardware to dignify his attitude" - inappropriate tone, and it also expresses the opinion that his skill justifies his childish behavior.
  • "Phil combines the mental capabilities of a rational adult with the maturity of a rebellious adolescent to create some great television." - pure opinion.

Let's discuss the changes here. Rhobite 16:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


Maybe you're the user reverting to your version, Mr. Rhobite. What is it that makes you so god damned special!? I mean, aren't we supposed to take a neutral perspective in the first place??? How is it neutral if you always get to be the point of reference!?!?!? Geez.

I agree with the previous poster. Granted, I don't know anything at all about poker or Hellmuth, but nobody here has a monopoly on truth. Frankly, I am offended that anyone here thinks I am not intelligent enough to distinguish fact and opinion on my own. Perhaps we should tolerate differing viewpoints and let the readers decide for themselves.

That person has been vandalizing different articles like saying Chris Moneymaker is a bad player and Paul Phillips is a "taker". This vandalism should just be reverted right away. If someone wants to make a case for a non-standard entry they can make it here, but this junk opinion just needs to be cleaned up whenever it appears. 2005 20:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
It's not my version, I didn't write this article. I just think that you may be confused about the requirements of the NPOV policy. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Why do you think that it is neutral to state that Hellmuth creates "great television", for example? That is your opinion. I'm not saying anything about your intelligence, I'm sure you're a very smart person. I just think that your edits express too much of an opinion about Hellmuth. Rhobite 01:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


Rhobite, I think the word "great" may be confusing you. Sure, what's great for me isn't necessarilly great for you; but when something is great for the many, the qualification becomes objective. Hellmuth is regularly the chosen televised table, and was invited to this year's tournament of champions event (despite not qualifying) solely for his television appeal. He currently has logged more minutes on ESPN than any other player. I'm sorry if you don't know this subject well enough to understand it, but Hellmuth is univerally known and agreed to produce great television. If I watched Michael Jordan play basketball and thought he was bad, it would not change the fact that he could be objectively described as a "great" basketball player. Please stick to material that you understand well enough to be able to determine what is subjective and what is not. I see in your profile that you are interested in photography; I'm sure there are plenty of photography related sections that you could do better work with.

Please review the NPOV policy again. It would be opinionated to state that Hellmuth makes "great television" which is "appealing", regardless of whether this is true or false. Most people think ice cream tastes great, yet you'll notice that ice cream doesn't say "ice cream tastes great". Also, please refrain from personal attacks. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Rhobite 13:42, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


Oh, now you're comparing the legendary Phil Hellmuth to a pint of rocky rhode ice cream? What has this discussion degraded into. Different people have different tastes, but Hellmuth's television appeal can be statistically proven. Perhaps "popular television" would be more accurate, but the phrase "great television" is understood to mean just that. "Ice cream tastes great" is not analagous because the verb 'tastes' serves as a link between the noun 'ice cream' and the adjective 'great' implying that ice cream is objectively great. This would be a foolish leap and it would violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Please keep this dialogue on topic and refrain from such faulty analogs. The subject matter of this discussion is Phil Hellmuth, not ice cream or your aversion to personal attack.

Let's let others chime in on this topic and come to a clear consensus. Hellmuth's television appeal is an integral part of his notoriety, and excluding it simply because one user deems it to be opinioniated would do a terrible injustice to this page and a disservice to the Wikipedia community. Voice your opinions here - let your voice be heard!!!

Please refrain from posting your POV into this or other articles. Your opinion that he makes great television, like your speculation about what hasn't been shown on TV before, is completely inappropriate and will be removed if added again. 2005 21:23, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Speculation about what hasn't been shown on TV before?? I assume you mean brushing his teeth on ESPN. This is entirely true. It aired on one of the 2003 WSOP broadcasts. Here is a link so some vidcaps of the segment: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.pokerplayer.se/images/phil.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.pokerplayer.se/idolbilder.htm&h=240&w=352&sz=69&tbnid=h2RiDQfTIXcJ:&tbnh=79&tbnw=116&hl=en&start=90&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dphil%2Bhellmuth%2B%26start%3D80%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN

I am saddened that you people insist on censoring objective truth. It's downright disgusting. If you insist on removing my edit simply because you do not have a full recollection of what has and what has not appeared on TV, then be ready for an all out war. I declare war on censor! You are either with us, or you're against us.

Up to this point all your contributions have been nonsense about Hellmuth making great TV and Raymer being fat. It's clear that you're just jerking people around here, so you've been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. You're free to come back when you have something useful to contribute. Rhobite 02:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Umm.... so you respond to censorship allegations by banning my ability to edit?

I don't think many people would argue that Hellmuth makes great TV and Raymer is fat. Not worth mentioning, perhaps, but certainly not 'nonsense.' I'm pretty sure I never said Raymer is fat. I like Raymer, and plus.... calling someone fat isn't really funny. That's not my style. But maybe I was drunk or something. I usually am. Anyways, thanks for taking this whole thing so seriously and providing me with a little comedic relief. It's good to know there are people like you watching out for us! The Phil Hellmuth Wikipedia page will be a more objective learning tool because of you!!! RHOBITE RULES!!!!!

[edit] A holiday wish to a Rhobite

Happy Thanksgiving Rhobite!

I'm not here to make friends, I'm here to help write an encyclopedia. If you can edit here without inserting your opinion into articles you are welcome to return in the future. Thanks. Rhobite 16:54, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I'll just wait til my IP address changes in a few days. Then I'll be able to insert all the opinions I want. You do noble things here. Whether or not you were trying to make a friend, you've made one in me, Rhobite. Would it be against Wiki's NPOV policy to say I love you?




"All of Hellmuth's WSOP bracelets have been won in hold 'em events, while other multiple bracelet winners have succeeded in a variety of games, including stud and Omaha. Hellmuth also has a reputation as a notoriously poor large stakes cash game player, and has earned his reputation solely on tournament performance."

This isn't really the type of "controversy" associated with that section. The fact that Hellmuth excels at NL Holdem tournaments really is not any sort of controversy, and its significance is already stated in addressing what tournaments he has won. His cash game reputation is not of any significance because he is not a cash game player. It's like saying "Barry Bonds is a bad infielder" is a controversy about Bonds' career.

[edit] Question about the "Personality and Controversy" section

Is it just me, or does this section seem wishy-washy about Hellmuth's on-air antics? The line "...perceived inability to gracefully handle adversity and defeat" is especially difficult for me, since there's no "perceived" about it. Hellmuth's a horrible loser, one of the worst I've seen in any kind of competition in some time, and while I'm sure it makes good TV (especially when the WSOP hosts are cracking on him), it's painful to watch. Here's a re-write of the section that I came up with:

Hellmuth is one of the most recognizable figures in poker, and many players and fans of the game have strong opinions about him, both negative and positive. His nine WSOP bracelets bring him much recognition, and fellow pros respect his talent for the game, but his notoriety is likely more due to his well-documented bragging and inability to gracefully handle adversity and defeat. He has made many notable boasts while playing poker tournaments, usually after losing hands or being eliminated. Some televised examples include "I guess if luck wasn't involved I'd win every one" and "I've revolutionized the way to play Texas Hold'em". During the 2005 World Series of Poker Main Event, Hellmuth stated that he could "dodge bullets" after making a laydown to an opponent with two Aces (the best possible starting hand). He is usually called "the Poker Brat" but is sometimes referred to as "Hell Mouth" (a play on his surname, which could also apply to the profanity-laden rants he is often shown voicing after losing). Producers of televised poker tournaments like to train their cameras on Hellmuth to be sure to capture any antics, and he is a target of pointed verbal barbs from hosts of these tournaments when he shows his temper. WSOP co-host Norman Chad is one of the harshest of Hellmuth's on-air critics.

Hellmuth wrote a book titled Poker Brat, which contains autobiographical material as well as poker advice. No matter what he accomplishes in the game, this moniker may be his lasting legacy.

How's this sound? Willbyr 06:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but that is way too much personal POV. The section isn't "wishy washy". It states facts. There is no reason to say his fame is "more likely" due to bragging or whatever. That certainly is not true, in my opinion, even if true in your opinion. The facts are that he is notable for outbursts and for poker accomplishments. there is no reason to speculate or weight those two things against each other. 2005 08:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

We can be more objective simply by finding more quotes by Hellmuth and, also, quotes about Phil Hellmuth from accomplished players. There's no shortage of either! - Richardcavell 13:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there's a lot of POV in that paragraph; I was mainly trying to take what had been written before and alter it to take out the notion that his behavior is something that is "perceived" as happening when it is blatantly obvious that it happens. The "more likely" line was in there to start with, I just didn't take it out...it was very late and I couldn't think of a better way to write it. I also agree with Richardcavell; a comprehensive list of quotes from Hellmuth would be very helpful, as well as comments about him from other players and the WPT and WSOP TV hosts. Willbyr 17:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There are already examples of his blowhard statements. The article doesn't need more. I don't see what you think is missing. He makes himself look like a dick. More quotes would be redundant and add nothing. The point is there. Also "perceived" definitely is more correct and needs to stay. Some of his outbursts are deliberately calculated. Many aren't but the article shouldn't gullibly fall for or ignore his sometimes publicity hounding. 2005 18:10, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I added a controversial quote of Hellmuth's and somebody removed it for no reason.

Use Wikiquote instead of Wikitionary then. That's the place for quotes to go. Essexmutant 11:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This page is still in need of some NPOV work. Since I know very little about the subject, I'll leave it to someone else. Have at it. Ckessler 00:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Please don't tag articles without being able to articulate a reason or even an example. 2005 06:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
A POV tag does nothing more than alert other editors to take a look at the article. POV is POV, no matter the subject, but I didn't feel qualified to alter any of the information in the article. An example?
  • "While many professional players, amateurs, and fans alike consider his antics distasteful and abrasive at times, they respect his talent for the game and his personality when he is away from the table. It can be contended that Hellmuth engages in some bad etiquette purposely, since a large part of selling his image is as a "poker brat." Got cites on that? Or is that your opinion?
  • "No matter what Hellmuth accomplishes in the game, this moniker may be his lasting legacy."
  • "It can be contended that Hellmuth has bad etiquette purposely, in order to gain attention and ratings. There is no doubt that Hellmuth does very well with the several publications he has written and in his endorsements. A large part of that can be attributed to selling his image as a "poker brat."
  • "While his nine WSOP bracelets bring him much recognition, his notoriety is more likely due to his perceived inability to gracefully handle adversity and defeat."

You have made changes to this article, so obviously, they were warranted. Please do not remove NPOV tags until the cleanup is done, they exist for a reason. Ckessler 07:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Adding a PoV tag with no stated reason is lazy at best. All you had to do was mention what you think is inappropriate. We aren't mindreaders. And then you even have the nerve to say not to remove POV tags until cleanup is done. It has been done. In the future please do not add tags without explaination, and without any apparent reason. These tags do exist for a reason, not to be applied cavalierly. By the way, you should refer to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Adding a tag or tags for specific citations would be appropriate, but this thing falls all over itself trying to avoid a POV on visual evidence, and has had literally dozens of POV/junk entries removed. Specifics help. Generalized assertion does not. 2005 10:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I think this sentence is not neutral: "While many professional players, amateurs, and fans alike consider his antics distasteful and abrasive at times, they respect his talent for the game and his personality when he is away from the table." I don't think the people who consider his antics "distasteful and abrasive" generally respect his personality. A lot of people, like I and people on parody websites, hate him.-RemyGreen

In regards to the current controversy about Hellmuth being a "tourney specialist" - if the person who wants that statement put in can find some quotes from other people saying that Hellmuth's cash game is weak, then I can see the statement meriting inclusion. As it is, the statement has no real value. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 16:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I changed the statement to only include the reference to the TV show comments, but that still needs a citation. Citing one person saying his game stinks adds nothing to the article and would just be citation POV. Multiple commenst on a TV could merit a sentence if cited, but you can easily find statements around the Internet saying almost any player plays lousy. 2005 20:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Fillmaff

I noticed that 2005 removed the brief paragraph I added about Bill Fillmaff. (I know I added it in a clumsy spot, but I was just hoping to make an initial stab that would then be better worked into the article.) It's since been rewritten and added back in, in a better spot, but I'm wondering why 2005 thought it was "tedious junk" in the first place. I do think Bill Fillmaff is a notable parody of Phil Hellmuth, especially considering Phil's appearances with Bill. - furrykef (Talk at me) 02:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The current text links to an internal article. It's still basically offtopic trivia that would be better left out of the article, but in its current format at least there isn't spam linking so I'm okay with it. 2005 02:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Mm, I had only provided the links as direct sources to cite. I'm also not sure how it's off-topic, because the parody does get to the core about what people find annoying about Phil Hellmuth. - furrykef (Talk at me) 05:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I put the Fillmaff bit at the end of the section. It didn't really fit where it was. Otto4711 14:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Heh, that's where I had originally put it. - furrykef (Talk at me) 01:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Tables?

2(+2)? I don't think it's very clear what this means... at least I'm not sure what it means. TheHYPO 07:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The (+2) is for the final tables in invitational events - specifically the Bad Boys of Poker II and Poker by the Book events. The (+1) under WSOP is for the money finish in the 2005 World Series of Poker Tournament of Champions. Thanks. Essexmutant 07:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 WSOP player of the year

Didn't he win this, after a deep cash in one of the last added bracelet events, or did Madsen cash in one of the last events too? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Funkadillo (talk • contribs).

This is cardplayer's listing of poy, [[1]] ▪◦▪=Sirex98= 06:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • 1 Michael Mizrachi
  • 2 Shannon Shorr
  • 3 Nam Le
  • 4 John Hoang
  • 5 Phil Hellmuth Jr.
No, this is about the WSOP Player of the Year award. Madsen did win it with Hellmuth finishing a close second. SubSeven 20:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
My mistake SubSeven is correct, Jeff Madsen Wins 2006 WSOP Player of the Year ▪◦▪=Sirex98= 20:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/h/i/Talk%7EPhil_Hellmuth_b2c1.html"