Grade the October Magazine

[jfk]

Mark,

Thanks for the reply and overview.

[jzpiano]

Not your best magazine, some of the articles were good, but a couple seemed like that were slapped together last minute. The NL article had a lot of thought and theory behind it. Sklansky's article althought I don't agree with 100% was good because it was a new idea.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
Editing: I didn't like the formatting. The minimum width of the window required to read the articles was too large. The black-on-gray is readable for me but not great.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more with this. I have a big monitor at home to play poker on but I often read these articles at work on a much smaller one. The side scrolling necessary on a 1024x768 resolution is totally unacceptable.

[sputum]

Copy the text and paste it into whatever floats your boat.
I liked this month's magazine a lot.

[cts]

Good god the HU NLHE article was awful. Ever think of getting someone with some real high stakes HU NLHE experience rather than some 4-year old that is buying in for 25BBs and open limping the SB with 72o?

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
Good god the HU NLHE article was awful. Ever think of getting someone with some real high stakes HU NLHE experience rather than some 4-year old that is buying in for 25BBs and open limping the SB with 72o?

[/ QUOTE ]

My first thought on this article was along those lines, too. There are a couple things in there that I felt were just flat out wrong. For example,

[ QUOTE ]
2. There are certain types of opponent where it is not necessarily advantageous to be deep-stacked. The most obvious is the hyper-aggressive maniac: it is very difficult to tell when this type of player is betting with a real hand and when he is bluffing, and so you will often have to make raises and calls with marginal hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
Good god the HU NLHE article was awful. Ever think of getting someone with some real high stakes HU NLHE experience rather than some 4-year old that is buying in for 25BBs and open limping the SB with 72o?

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Dynasty -- I was trying to figure out a diplomatic way to ask this, but then I decided that diplomacy is unnecessary.

As an editor, why would you accept a *strategy* article that's written by someone playing $200 NL?

I would trust 2+2ers logging playing time at $200 games to have useful advice on megamultitabling and bonus whoring (the keys to profitability at that level), but I would not trust them at all for sound strategic advice.

Even if you're not willing to enforce some sort of basic competency requirement for your authors, you should, as cts suggested, have someone who plays high-stakes NL vet your NL articles to avoid embarrassments like this.