Mike Matusow Containment Thread
Mike has stolen from his family - source -
Scott Matusow and Mike on occasion
Mike is known to have "borrowed" from Daniel
I get why people knock Mike, but he was a huge part of the poker boom. Like him or not, he brought attention to the game, had some solid results, and was always entertaining. That counts for something.Yeah, his recent play isn’t what it used to be and the baggage is real, but let’s not pretend the Hall of Fame is only full of squeaky clean crushers. Devilfish got in and Mike’s
hi mike
fwiw i think you should get in, not for skill though just as a media personality
same way they bring in team owners, broadcasters, etc in other halls
Around that time iirc Ted was back East playing low limits so I think he was probably running away from debts. Now I don’t see him at all.
Todd was a part of that Andy Beal game and took Andy for most
I haven’t read the book, but wasn’t Ted Forrest a leading character in that book ‘The Biggest Game in Town’ based off those games (I could’ve done 2 mins of googling and answered my question, but I’m confident even when wrong).
Todd Brunson is cooking pizza and trolling Chainsaw these days. I don’t think anyone with a brain doubts the ‘old-timers’ are outclassed by the younger generation (who grew up and, in part, were inspired by the guys they mock now).
I’m just saying the committee that decides who gets into the HOF needs to rethink their rules (will cumicon or RedBaron (sp?) get in? ForHaley? All them deserve it, but who knows who they are? (Been out of touch, maybe their names are known now, but my point stands).
Matusow made poker fun to watch. He was a character. He definitely contributed a lot to the game. He’s obviously well past his prime, but so what. Unlike baseball or football, he can play as long as he wants to.
Ted was a legend. I know he steals water bottles now, so what? Has any player besides Doyle stood up to the new generation? Doyle’s like Jordan. If that’s the bar, then it’s too high.
It’s not the Medal of Honor.
It’s recognizing this player meant something to the history of the game, in a positive way. Both can be said of Matusow and Forrest (latter ahead of the former).
But as my understanding of the rules for getting into the HOF sits now, a lot of deserving players will never make it (including young legends).
Edit: and if we’re talking about debts, apparently Tom owes quite a bit, and now he’s in an asylum. Does he not deserve a spot? I say he does.
Edit 2: I’ll correct myself and say that for players, it should be the best players at their time. Exceptions made for people like Sexton, hole-card cam inventor, and Pokerstars founder, etc.).
Forrest was 'The Suicide King' in Michael Craig's book. He wasn't originally part of the group that pooled to play Beal. He just heard there was a huge game going down, so rocked up to play. Degen much..?
He went to the poker room and sat down with his last $500,000. He played against Chip Reese and Andy Beal. Forrest had lost $400,000 without playing a single hand, and questioned why he was there.
Mike was to the poker boom what Newman was to Seinfeld IMO.
Maybe they should start a WSOP HOF as there is nothing about donkaments in the criteria iirc. Ted should be in both.
I saw the Mike Matusow documentary the other day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgJqnNP2...
What a sad man. He's got mental problems, physical problems, he's past his prime in terms of skill, though they gave the documentary a happy ending, saying that he's improved his life and is looking forward to the future, etc.
It seems like a 2 hour commercial to try to get him into the poker hall of fame.
They way they describe it is that the committee who votes on it doesn't seem to like him personally. Looking at the requirements he's a bit iffy on the "Played consistently well, gained the respect of peers, and stood the test of time." part though if you look at a bunch of other people who got in (Todd Brunson???) , seems like they haven't met some of those requirements either, so I guess it's just a subjective thing.
They should have cut at least 30 minutes of that documentary though, maybe even trim it down to 1 hour.
He's 57, he's alive and he had a heck of a run. Seems like he's done better than most gambling degenerates....
He had some funny bits a few years back about the mark up police, too bad he couldn't keep the comedy up. I had started following his youtube channel but once it went back to mediocre poker I was out.
For anyone who hasn't seen them
Seems like a mid 2000s home project skit. Not particularily funny and extremely bad acting. The Deeb joke got me though, I have to admit.
That's 38 seconds I'll never get back.
Doesn't really have a HoF case if you just look at the poker achievements. The books I've read suggest that even at his peak he wasn't playing in the biggest cash games, but was instead more of an upper-middle stakes reg. Countless tournament players have achieved more. Danny Alaei won more bracelets in a decade of grinding poker than Matusow has in 25 years. Younger players are going to keep running him down in the bracelet and earnings count.
However, Moneymaker is in the HoF and I definitely don't think he meets the criteria from a poker standpoint. There's some value in being poker-famous and marketing the game. Mike was an A- list star at the peak of the boom. Memorable moments on ESPN. Deep runs in 2004, 2005, 2008. ToC winner. For better or worse, an indelible character of the era. This thread shows why Mike has a case. It's a reply magnet. Something about Mike generates interest and engagement, even if it's tinged with negativity.
They really just need to open up the HoF to 4-5 new entries per year instead of the punitively restrictive 1-2 entries. Get Isai, Lon and Norm, Forrest, and some of these also-rans in there before the logjam is further clogged by the internet kid generation turning 40+. People like Schulman, Deeb, and Cates are coming down the pipeline and it's going to be that much harder to make a case for the old heads.
It was amazing, unadultered comedic genius. I feel awful for you that you can't understand and appreciate what a masterful work of art that was.
Just considering him in regards to his fame status, Mike should get in before any random "internet guy" who has won a handful of bracelets and a Triton event or something. They don't change the landscape of poker and they simply dont stand out despite their excellent accolades.
Mike was certainly a key cog in the explosion of poker. Hellmuth and him played the villains and any good story needs a good villain right? People loved to hate Mike, but you also felt sorry (pity) for him.
How could we get the HOF board to like Mike?
Mike has his own thread on this board. How many other HOFers can even say that?
The staying power of his poker relevance deserves to get him over the hump in the HOF selection.
