[Iceman]

I doubt anyone could beat David Sklansky in a mixed game involving many different forms of poker. David's knowledge of poker theory is unparalleled, and contrary to the comment, he is very able to apply that theory to the games. If he doesn't have the bankroll for 2000-4000 that doesn't mean he's a lesser player - even if he did, why play that if he could earn more in 30-60 and 80-160? Brunson may be better than Sklansky specifically at shorthanded high-ante games and deep money no-limit, where reading opponents counts for a lot more, and theoretical knowledge is relatively less important.