How good is David Sklansky?

[pokerisme]

[ QUOTE ]
On a more general note, the conventional wisdom is that preflop decisions are fairly routine after you have gained some experience and where you make money is with your postflop decisions. I wonder if that is really true. In many games that I play in, I don't find that there is much difference in ability betwen me and most of my opponents when it comes to postflop play. Preflop is where I distinguish myself from these guys. Specifically, most guys who think that they play well and do in fact play well, play hands that are money losers. Put another way, they handicap themselves too much preflop and can't make it up with their excellent postflop play.

So, IMO, we have come full circle in Hold 'em: Preflop is where you make your money these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

skp,

Leave it to an old timer to get to something really important. Where is the money made? preflop? postflop? Maybe you need to play great both preflop and post flop to get the money now. I'm old school. Post flop is where the most money goes into the pot (usually true in nl, definitely in limit and pl). To be honest though I have no way of proving that great post flop play will make up for poor or mediocre preflop play.

Does it matter? Of course. The truth always matters. But does it really matter whether preflop play or post flop play gets the cheese? Poker can be very frustrating for anyone and even more so for someone trying to play optimally. Optimal play may even be the most boring thing a poker player can encounter. If Fossilman is correct about DS's play (and knowing Fossilman he is on the money) then it's no wonder Sklansky looks for diversions such as Horse racing. My god he must be bored to death playing limit poker. NL would be intolerable as tight as Sklansky reportedly plays.

Sure, as Sklansky himself has stated, "poker playing is about winning money" but there are lot's of ways of making money. Why would you choose to bore yourself to death just to make your money? Playing more hands might be detrimental to your bankroll. But, so what? If you are a winning player and playing more hands gives you more pleasure than sitting there bored out of your gord then I say that's the way to play poker. Have some fun for crying out lout! Play that 7,2o (in the small blind of course for one chip) and some other mediocre hands that you normally would donk.

But again fun is not the issue. The issue is whether in todays game if optimal preflop play is more important than optimal post flop play. So how do we come to the right conclusion? This really sounds like a good topic for the Poker Theory forum where Sklansky himself might get involved.

pokerisme

[JJNJustin]

Sklansky's a mathematician, and his forte is the mathematics of gambling. He applies mathematics and statistics to various forms of gambling in order to make profits. I believe his main focus has been forms of gambling that are beatable mathematically, such as blackjack, poker, even horseracing. I think D.S.'s main focus in his gambling is to make money and looking for situations he can exploit for profit. I dont think being a "superstar" means anything to him. And although theoretically he can hang with the best of them at any game, I think an important part of his philosophy is finding a beatable game. Why play a game that is only slightly beatable with very large SD when there are plenty of games that are very beatable with much less SD. And I dont think he gives 2 cents what anybody thinks of him, especially younger players on this website. Gambling is not really about being a superstar. There are a lot more benefits in being an unknown.

-J

[murph0110]

This question of how good Sklansky is goes back to the original rgp days over 10 years ago, and even before that...

The answer is the same then as it is now... He is a good player, not a great player. As he was routinely able to beat the 20/40 Mirage games years ago, that's makes him (probably) good enough to beat the levels that Raymer is talking about today...

My concern, as others have posted, is he is not even close to as great as he thinks he is - hence - his defensiveness when questioned on the subject...

This is not uncommon with the great poker authors - Malmuth, Rolf, and especially Caro - tyring to justify how great they are. Big difference between being a good poker player and a great poker player...

I assume they feel some sort of need to represent to those purchasing their books that they are great, or no need to buy books from those who are good players.

and no, he is not in the top ten of theorists, he is number one... and yes, i have played with him..

[SNOWBALL]

I'm surprised that Jimmy guy hasn't showed up in this thread yet. Hahahaha.

[El Diablo]

All,

"he lacks concentration."

"he seems pained to be at the table and in the presence of such lesser minds playing a boring game"

"MR. S, you may find, through your observation, most likely suffers from ADD."

Hmmm, this all adds up with what I have heard recently. Apparently he lately has been 20-tabling 1k/2k LHE, 1k/2k O8, 1k/2k Stud, 300/600NL, and 200/400 PLO online.

nh el D

[fsuplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
nh el D

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah dude, high five!

borat

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that he has a sizeable edge in the stud stud/hl, o8, razz, badugi, Triple draw games and probably lacks a little in the other games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but to my knowledge he doesn't play Triple Draw or Badugi. High variance once again.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that he has a sizeable edge in the stud stud/hl, o8, razz, badugi, Triple draw games and probably lacks a little in the other games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but to my knowledge he doesn't play Triple Draw or Badugi. High variance once again.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


I saw him and raymer sitting in a 300/600 mixed game during the series. I am fairly sure it was b.o.t.e. They were playing omaha while I watched.