Re: Proof of Sklansky\'s theorem?
I think you could construct your own non-rigorous proof quite eaisly, just by attempting to define a "Mistake" in poker and then attempt to come up with situations where you would make said mistake if you knew the cards.
It may even be trivial to prove in a more serious way, but I've never seen a poker idea solved in such a way and seriously doubt it's value.
|