David Sklansky and the big Bellagio game.

[ToneLoc]

What poker/personal skills does David Sklansky lack to play in the big Bellagio poker game.

Discuss.

Note: the real point of this is to discover what “non-book” skills are necessary to hit it big-time. This should be of interest for all of us trying to move to hgh stakes games, where the guys obviously know their stuff.

J.

[D.H.]

[ QUOTE ]
What poker/personal skills does David Sklansky lack to play in the big Bellagio poker game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he doesn't lack anything at all, but feels that are lots of more profitable games out there for him to play. Or maybe not. I don't know.

[Rudbaeck]

I don't see the point to this thread. Is there a point beside flaming?

[partygirluk]

I think this is an interesting question.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is an interesting question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some likely possibilities:
He doesn't like having an 'almost break even day' and lose $40,000?
Even the fish at this level know ever nuance of Sklansky's play.
He isn't good enough at tell reading/obscuring?
He isn't interested in games where you in the very best case have one opponent who doesn't play flawless poker?

We have plenty of posters here who could beat the party 15/30 game, and still play 3/6 despite that.

[patrick dicaprio]

why is there the assumption that a particular player lacks some skill, either personal or otherwise, when they dont play at the highest level. is theresome perosnal pride involved? otherwise i dont see why anyone would want to play against the best players in the world with extremely high variance when they can play lower levels and win withmuch more ease, less variance and better results.

the highest game i have seen was 4000/8000 at the bellagio and of the six players one was doyle, one was chip reese and one was johnny chan. who the hell wants to play in that game except the sucker casino owners who were there?

Pat

[Noo Yawk]

Some people are smart enough to know their risk/reward tolerance and don't give a damn what others think about them. Respect for money and the confidence to be yourself are pretty good character traits in my book.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Some people are smart enough to know their risk/reward tolerance and don't give a damn what others think about them. Respect for money and the confidence to be yourself are pretty good character traits in my book.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm 95% sure I've seen basically these reasons in a post by Mr. Sklansky himself.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
the highest game i have seen was 4000/8000 at the bellagio and of the six players one was doyle, one was chip reese and one was johnny chan. who the hell wants to play in that game except the sucker casino owners who were there?


[/ QUOTE ]

Three of the very best players and three 'suckers'. That got to be as near as perfect 4000/8000 game as one could ever dream about. (Unless one of the nameless casino owners/managers was Bobby Baldwin off course.)

There are fewer suckers as one progresses up limits, and at these limits I guess a good game is one where one of the WCPs got a bad nights sleep is classified as good, and the posted game is classified as christmas. Otoh there are people willing to piss away amazing amounts of money, so a few live ones might still be around. (Does Bill Gates play losing poker?)

[MelchyBeau]

I thought I read somewhere where Gates plays low limit hold'em. I hope he doesn't go bankrupt playing 2-4 holdem :P

Melch

[AAeyes]

Sklansky's books are about winning money at poker. I've never met the man personally, but I assume he doesn't write about the game as logically as he does and then go play as a boost to his ego. I'd be willing to bet if he felt the game was more profitable than some others available to him he would play in it. If that's not the case, and Mr. Sklansky is lacking in some way as to make him back away from the game, hopefully he will enlighten us here.

That to me would be the more interesting question... What do the world's foremost poker authorities site as leaks in their own game?

Best Wishes

AAeyes

[schroedy]

Gates used to be regular in the Mirage 3/6 I heard.

[gummy d]

kind of off subject, but i was in tunica over the summer and David won the $30 limit/no limit rebuy add on tournament held at gold strike. i got knocked out shortly after it switched to no limit (should have rebought, ie. donated) and moved over to the 1-2 nl game where i won about 700. i think David won about 1500 in the tournament. in my opinion some people just like to play... /images/graemlins/wink.gif It doesn't have to be bigger to be action and he doesn't strike me as an action junkie. Doyle however is another story..
gummy d

[ToneLoc]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the point to this thread. Is there a point beside flaming?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to make something clear, this thread is not at all about flaming. It is about finding what makes the difference in a game of a very high theoretical caliber (ie where everyone knows poker theory very well).

And I used mr Sklansky as an example of the extremely good theoretical player, who passes on this game, nothing personal here (well also it guarantees some reads!).

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the point to this thread. Is there a point beside flaming?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to make something clear, this thread is not at all about flaming. It is about finding what makes the difference in a game of a very high theoretical caliber (ie where everyone knows poker theory very well).

[/ QUOTE ]

You spend more time waiting for the fish? You're bedside prayer includes giving regulars nightmares so they will make one or two mistakes over the course of ten hours?