PDA

View Full Version : Poker Digest: Top 50 Movers & Shapers


05-11-2002, 06:40 PM
Poker Digest's cover story in their most recent issue is a 9-page article about the most influential people in poker. It is not until half way through the 9th page that this selection is made.


David Sklansky (strategist) with his partner Mason Malmuth


They moderate a newsgroup forum that focuses primarily on game theory and poker strategies, often a level above other usenet sites. David and Mason's long collaboration has produced numerous poker books, now seen in circulation in major bookstores.


However, Mason seems to think otherwise.


This a quote from one of Mason's posts in the Internet Gambling Forum. Although it is taken from the context of a discussion on a specific topic, I believe it can stand alone without losing any of it's meaning. Note: "we" is not specifically clear and I have assumed it means S&M&Z or 2+2 Publishing in general.


Mason Malmuth: I now believe, and this is just my opinion, that we are now the most influential people in all of poker. Since we don't surround ouselves with a lot of hype, not everyone realizes this yet.


So what do we think?


And I thought David and Ray worked for Mason. What's with this "partner" business? /images/smile.gif

05-11-2002, 09:59 PM
Dynasty,


Here's my list in order:


1) Mason Malmuth--because he responded to the first post I put up on this forum on "AA Cracked" and explained how to properly play them a few years ago when this forum was one forum. Futhermore, he continues to provide examples in his "Hand To Talk About" posts that illustrate the theory in his books. Who else would provide this stuff for free. It's like finding a pot-of-gold.


2) Ray Zee--provides the best one liners that make you think.


3) David Sklansky--asks questions and gives answers, but you have to figure out why his answers are correct.


Enough said.


Good Luck


Mark

05-11-2002, 10:31 PM
If they aren't #1, I can't imagine them being out of the top 3. The availability of their books in major chains and through sites such as Amazon.com have without a doubt had significant impact on the broadening of the base of poker players. Every major "name" in poker has read their books.


Bringing knowlege to the masses for absurdly cheap prices is, I think, the most important thing to happen to poker. Ever.

05-11-2002, 10:51 PM
that would be paradise poker (and its imitators).


it's always a contest each month to decide which rag is least worthy to wipe my ass with: poker digest or card player.

05-11-2002, 11:14 PM
HEY- PokerBabe(aka) has the best "shaper" in poker, IMO. Why is she not on the list?

05-12-2002, 03:43 AM
perhaps they didn't read these forums well enough when they were making the list. you're on my list of top 2+2 posters.

05-12-2002, 04:16 AM
First, I wrote the above about us before I saw the Poker Digest artice.


One of the problems that we at Two Plus Two have in this world of poker is that many of the people involved with these magazines and writing the articles are in my opinion extremely unknowledgeable. A good example is a previous article by the same author where she was discussing recent developments in poker. She was aware of the Internet but was completely unaware of this site even though she mentioned RGP. Now I can't prove it, but I believe that we have more traffic than RGP, and certainly the quality of serious poker discussion is better.


But the bottom line is the books. We now have 26 titles in our family and this includes not only how to play very well, but a book for total beginners, a book for dealers, and much information on how cardrooms should be run. I don't believe that there is any aspect of poker that we haven't influenced, and I also strongly believe that we have done this in a very positive way.

05-12-2002, 04:23 AM
As I stated below, the writers and management affiliated with many of these gambling magazines are just not very knowledgeable of what is happening in Two Plus Two land. If they were, you, PokerBabe, would have certainly been on the list.

05-12-2002, 09:41 AM

05-12-2002, 10:04 AM
he is now. when i first met him he wasnt, but thru my get direction he has become quite wealthy. he will never catch up with me though even though he has demoted me to his assitant.

05-12-2002, 03:26 PM
...not to utilize this site.


I have to say that when you add the library of poker titles to the DAILY valuable information one can cull from the forum(s)...


Ding Ding! We have us a winner!


Oh, yeah. That is, of course, unless you need a huge dose of totally juvenile in-fighting and accusing and sometimes even abject lunacy.


In which case the other place has this beat hands-down.


Sorry, guys!

05-12-2002, 06:40 PM
I have to admit, I have learned a ton from following along in here, and reading the 2+2 books. The thing I really like about this forum is the same thing I always liked about discussions after reading in college. It gives the oppertunity to explore the concepts we have read about, and it also helps really see them applied. Many of the more experienced posters here remind me of one of my current bosses. We are all techies, so we sometimes deal with very complex ideas and theories. This guy helps you really understand things and put them into action, and that is the mark of a good teacher.


It's hard to believe I found this place from an off hand remark by a guy I was playing 3/6 with almost 2 years ago. If I knew his name, I'd thank him. lol


Fitz

05-13-2002, 11:31 AM
I was on RGP for a short while - when I was trying to learn as much as possible online using online resources.


Big waste of time....this forum is much better and less spam, griping - I hope those RGP's never come over here and do to this forum what they've done to that one.


I'm not positive expectation yet, but with your help, (and your latest 3 books on poker essays) - I'll get there soon. I owe you guys one myself.


RB

05-13-2002, 12:13 PM
r.g.p. used to be a lot better, back in the days when people like Paul Pudaite, Michael Hall, and Andy Morton were around and posting. (Andy died in a motorcycle crash; whatever happened to Paul and Mike?)


Don't sneer too much at r.g.p.ers, a bunch of them post regularly here. (Hi, Lee!)

05-13-2002, 02:11 PM
Michael Hall = Abdul, no?

05-13-2002, 02:17 PM
Mason writes...


Now I can't prove it, but I believe that we have more traffic than RGP, and certainly the quality of serious poker discussion is better.


1. As to the traffic, I claim that it's possible to reasonably estimate the amount of traffic on r.g.p. and 2+2. For instance, a metric such as the average number of readers per post. I will bet any one person $500 (even money) that the number for r.g.p. is higher (my offhand guess is that it's something like an order of magnitude higher).


2. Quality of discussion? The S/N ratio is an order of magnitude higher here. Though balt9999 is having a deleterious effect on that.


Regards, Lee

05-13-2002, 03:28 PM
But how do you get the figure for number of readers per post on rgp?


I wouldn't be surprised if there were more posts here, though maybe Russ G has changed that. /images/ohwell.gif

05-13-2002, 03:45 PM
"2. Quality of discussion? "


Well there certainly is a lot more noise on RGP. And 2+2 is THE PLACE to discuss hands. But one good thing about RGP is discussions can last weeks or even months. An interesting discusion on 2+2 gets buried within days, never to be seen again. I think that's one big problem with some of 2+2's best posts/topics.

05-13-2002, 03:49 PM
I have even seen David Sklansky post on RGP.

05-13-2002, 10:20 PM
some points:


1. RGP really is bottom of the barrel. So many of those "Newgca" posts--who is that?


2. 2 + 2 is the best for discussion and humor (balt999 notwithstanding). The posts are eduacational and often funny.


3. Lee, can we exile balt999 to RGP?

05-14-2002, 05:51 PM
"Since we don't surround ouselves with a lot of hype,"


Speaking as an S&M apologist, I have to admit that this comment of Malmuth's made me chuckle.