Re: Sklansky on Razz
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Sklansky on Razz" was combined with some essays and articles, and become "Sklansky on Poker". Get that if you wanted an updated version.
[/ QUOTE ]
Was the razz section revised at all when SOR was compiled? I am under the impression that it wasn't, so if that's true the information is 25 yrs old if not the actual paper it was printed on. TT and I had a vigorous debate a few months back about the relevance of SOR to todays razz games, with my opinion being that it was mostly outdated. If you want to judge for yourself, compare how Sklansky describes what to expect from your opponents to how other guys play at the the table today. It's like two different games.
[/ QUOTE ]
I destroy lower limit games just by using the concepts learned from SOR. Popular counter-points are that the competition at the lower limits is much worse, which is true, but my pots are much larger as a result of reading SOR. Re-raising on 3rd with a slightly worse showing upcard but a very live draw has worked wonders for me. I also save many more bets on average b/c I know when to chase and not to chase.
One thing that I have noticed though is that there are a few mathematical errors early in the book. E.g. when Sklansky differentiates between the 15/30 and 30/60 games, some of the addition is incorrect. I don't have my copy nearby but this has been discussed recently in the Stud forums.
If you want to say it's outdated, then perhaps it could use a bit of modification regarding the betting structures that are more common today but most of the concepts are still spot-on IMO. Also, further discussion on how to adjust in the higher ante games would be nice, but you can search the Stud forum and learn that.
Edit: I just realized that my 1000th post on this site is about Razz. Whoda' thunk that?
|