Stu Ungar v. Sklanksy

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
As great as Stuey's talent was, remember this:
When he won the 3 WSOP ME he never had more than 400 entrants,
and his early wins were still in the era of very tight play
for most players, which Stuey exploited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I guess then no bracelet is worth anything before 2002 then. Those 80-entry tourneys where 70 od the players are top-level pros were simple to win.

[imported_CaseClosed326]

Yeah, I am retarded.

[vic1225]

This is great point. To fully understand what Stuey did for poker was phenomenal. He started the wave of being Loose aggressive and winning. At that time period where tight play was the only logical way to play he must of frustrated players and made every play they reacted to very complex.

[blaze666]

Sklansky has a snowman's chance in hell. actually, i haven't been into poker for that long. but iv'e seen the sort of thing that ungar can do.

[Walter Pullis]

I'm not saying that Sklansky is/was better than Ungar. I am saying that it is easier to win a tournament of 100 entrants even if all the entrants are top pros, that a field of 2000 with, lets say, 300 pros. Where did I come up with the number 300? It's arbitrary, but remember that before the last 7-8 years, almost all participants in the WSOP were Americans.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
This is great point. To fully understand what Stuey did for poker was phenomenal. He started the wave of being Loose aggressive and winning. At that time period where tight play was the only logical way to play he must of frustrated players and made every play they reacted to very complex.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't Doyle do that before Stuey?

[arod15]

Can someone answer me who on paper just based on tournament wins who is more accomplished? Whoever that is, from my knowledge thats Stuey i take the better resume. "Theory is great but instincts seperate the man from the boys" something like that in Cloutier's book i agree. Theory is good but to be at the highest levels you need more than that

[MMMMMM]

...as to who would be expected to win?

I've played a LOT of poker over the last 17 years, and I don't know who would be favored today in the matchup so described. How the hell would you guys know (either way)?

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
...as to who would be expected to win?

I've played a LOT of poker over the last 17 years, and I don't know who would be favored today in the matchup so described. How the hell would you guys know (either way)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this IS a discussion forum. I see no problem with dicussing things.

[Mike Haven]

i heard they ran a sim on this match-up at uoa and ungar won 6/4 - it seems after this there's no longer any debate