[jfk]

The strategy contributions (I'm including sports betting in the group) this month are as good as they've ever been. There's a lot to consider and many different games are covered. It has made for excellent, thought provoking reading.

Ray Zee is a deservedly beloved icon at 2+2 but his last couple of contributions here bring to mind stories about Picasso in his later years angling for free restaurant meals by doodling on a napkin. His was a poor effort.

Mason's article is no better and reflects an overwrought view of history. Taking an interesting footnote and making absurd extrapolations doesn't make for good reading or good historical interpretation.

If the "celebrity" interviews continue, it would be of interest to see more involved questions. Might Phil Laak discuss how much of his income is now derived from play and how much is derived from endorsements, backing or just being Phil Laak? How much has television pumped money into the pockets of recognized players? To what extent is a gimmick, a nickname or a contentious personality a key to getting noticed and being included in the non-poker derived income stream. Exploring that portion of the poker economy/world would make for good reading and may point players towards more reliable sources of poker income.