[brendons31]

[/ QUOTE ]

The blind structure was different, often a single blind and antes. The players were much more likely to be weak tight.
[ QUOTE ]


Any evidence that players were much more likely to be weak tight back then?


[ QUOTE ]


I doubt he would mistitle a thread like this. You posed it as an open question but clearly this is a thread on your dislike of Supersystem.

And then as proof you tell us that his system still wins for him. This makes no sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very much an open question, got any suggestions of a more over-rated book? I fail to think of one that comes close. Mike Caro's book of tells is another which I think is over-rated, doesn't he put specific $ values on how much you can expect to make off knowing a tell?

I wouldn't have a clue how much $ Doyle has won or lost over his lifetime, I think its somewhat irrelevant. If he had won the WSOP main event 10 times in a row that wouldn't make the quality of the writing in the NL section of SS any better.

Just becuase someone is great at something it certianly doesn't make them a great teacher/coach at it. There are many sports examples of great athletes making poor coaches.

Lets say Doyle is a big winner over live cash games over his life time. You don't think this success is due to his "feel" for the game, ie. his ability to read situations, and read people. He talks about pushing his inside straight draws and well pretty much any draw etc.

It can work for Doyle becuase he likely knows exactly when to push, he knows when his opponent is weak and capabale of folding. This is the sort of ability that really can't be taught through a book.

You don't think that being good/ great at something and being a good/great coach at something is somewhat mutually exclusive.