Comparing Sklansky in SS1 to Zee's Hi/Low Split - The Trap

[TomBrooks]

I have read through most of Sklansky's Stud 8 Section in SS1 and Zee's Stud 8 in HLSPFAP. I am far from having it all down pat and certainly need to go back and review both, but in the meantime I have one initial impression I'd like to ask about.

David seems to emphasize going for low and avoiding all but the best highs a lot more than Ray. Ray spends a fair amount of time talking about high hands that are playable.

Are these two works esposing different theories, or are they congruent in a way that has just escaped me so far?

[Bremen]

They're talking about different games. Sklansky wrote about a game with no qualifier for lo. Zee's section deals with games where there is a qualifier of 8 or better for low.

[Beavis68]

Right, without a qualifier, lows are much more common.

[TomBrooks]

Ah, I didn't even realize the distinction yet. Thanks.

[kidcolin]

Common, as in every hand.

[Bremen]

To illustrate just how bad high hands are without a qualifier rolled K's are a dog against Q76.

[nanoCRUSHER]

I hate to hijack the thread like this, but in HLSP's stud section it recommends to read Sklansky's 7-stud hi-lo no qualifier section in SSI for conceptual background. My question is, how essential is this section to successful stud8 play?

[Andy B]

Not terribly. Ray Zee's book is really all you'll ever need. There are other books that are helpful, and I would recommend TOP, 7CS4AP, and SS2 ahead of S/S for stud/8.

[dibbs]

Sorry for the hijack but,

How applicable are the Escape out Sklansky discusses? Do players on here use a modified system of this idea for the new structure?

[DeadMoneyOC]

Read Todd Brunsons section in SS2 also.

[Notorious G.O.B.]

Well, whenever you're dead for half the pot, they apply, I assume.