[GiantBuddha]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
It's boring. You can't make any hands. Just numbers. Most of what's interesting about poker is reading hands. That's the allure and much of the skill. There's probably the least hand reading in razz of any major variant.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have no idea how ignorant that statement is. Razz is probably one of the easiest games for hand reading, why do you think Sklansky used more razz examples than anything else in Theory of Poker?


[/ QUOTE ]

I was trying to figure out why you said I was being ignorant and then basically said what I was trying to say. Due to a typo and some poor wording, I obviously didn't communicate what I meant. My point was:

Hand reading is simpler in razz than many other games, and thus less interesting (to many people). No one's on a flush draw, no one looks like a low but is really going high. If you can't read hands in razz, you clearly won't do well, but just because you can read hands doesn't mean you will do well if you don't make the right play. I think the complexity of hand reading in a game like holdem is more interesting than "Did he start good? Did that card pair him?" I find stud probably the most interesting, but it's hard to find a stud game these days.

And when I say it's boring, I mean that a lot of people find it boring. A lot of NL players find limit boring, too, and vice versa. Personally, I like all the games. I think razz just appeals to a smaller audience.