wilson software versus 7csfap

[fraac]

Are there strategy differences between Wilson's Advisor and 7csfap? Do you disagree with either?

[Andy B]

I can't comment on the Wilson software. 7CS4AP has some issues with things like grammar and spelling, but the advice is generally spot-on.

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
Are there strategy differences between Wilson's Advisor and 7csfap? Do you disagree with either?

[/ QUOTE ]

I own both.

Overall, I've been very unimpressed with the adviser's advice in any of the Wilson Turbo programs...most notably O8.

But you asked about Stud. I've noted on a few occasions that the adviser has me calling completions cold on 3rd with a likely underpair and/or a hand with a few too many dead cards.

I've read 7CSFAP, one of the most under-rated 2+2 books IMO, and have done quite well against the players in Wilson's software. The software is great practice when you're offline and also a good program just to match wits with, see if your calculation of odds match up during a hand, etc.

I'd definitely read the book. As for the software, it's really up to you. Just note, if the advice from each differ and you don't know which side to believe, believe the book.

[Red_Diamond]

[ QUOTE ]
7CS4AP has some issues with things like grammar and spelling, but the advice is generally spot-on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy, that is not including the 21st Century Edition is it? The only real problem I find annoying in some 2+2 books, is a little issue about no-limit being spelt as no limit. It may not seem that big a deal to most, but to grammarians & linguistics it drives them up the wall especially when used as multiple modifiers.

[Andy B]

Including the 21st Century edition. All of the 2+2 books have issues, although Ed Miller's books are markedly better than the others.

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
7CS4AP has some issues with things like grammar and spelling, but the advice is generally spot-on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy, that is not including the 21st Century Edition is it? The only real problem I find annoying in some 2+2 books, is a little issue about no-limit being spelt as no limit. It may not seem that big a deal to most, but to grammarians & linguistics it drives them up the wall especially when used as multiple modifiers.

[/ QUOTE ]

spelt???

Irony. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Red_Diamond]

I was a little too distracted by the chest on your avatar... [sic]

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
I was a little too distracted by the chest on your avatar... [sic]

[/ QUOTE ]

100% understood. J. Love Hewitt will do that to anybody.

[jordiepop]

Andy B is great. That is all.

[Andy B]

"Spelt" is perfectly correct. Or were you referring to the fact that it's a punctuation issue, not a spelling issue?