David Sklansky's tournament experience?

[daryn]

wow, inthacup's old avatar!

[kenewbie]

For the love of god stop comparing coaching a sports team to writing a book on poker. Its not even close to the same thing.

An author cannot write a brilliant poker book without being brilliant in poker (though the opposite is ofcourse true, you can be an excellent player and yet be unable to put it down in words).

Coaching a team is not the same as playin in it, first off you have physical limitations ofcourse but apart from that the coaches job is strategy and coordination, the players are there to put that strategy into motion. A great coach can ofcourse be a horrible player and vice versa, the skills required does not overlap.

k

[chson]

[ QUOTE ]
The fields were so small 20 years ago that a win doesn't mean nearly as much as it does today, just look at the 1st place prize money David won for Draw High in '82, $15k!

I'd take Scott Fischmann's (sp?) 2004 results over Sklansky's in a heartbeat.

Even if the original poster is trolling, it's a relevant question to ask. And saying DS is a theorist just doesn't cut it. If you understand these concepts, you should be able to apply them, especially in limit where people reading skills are of less value.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely agree with you. If somebody can crush the Las Vegas mid-limit games for 1 BB an hour then theoretically they could do fairly well in the "big" Limit tournaments of today.

[chson]

[ QUOTE ]
For the love of god stop comparing coaching a sports team to writing a book on poker. Its not even close to the same thing.

An author cannot write a brilliant poker book without being brilliant in poker (though the opposite is ofcourse true, you can be an excellent player and yet be unable to put it down in words).

Coaching a team is not the same as playin in it, first off you have physical limitations ofcourse but apart from that the coaches job is strategy and coordination, the players are there to put that strategy into motion. A great coach can ofcourse be a horrible player and vice versa, the skills required does not overlap.

k

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct. I brought this matter up earlier but obviously it fell on deaf ears.

[jimswarthow]

If you are not able to recognize Mr. Sklansky's innate talent for explaining in a mathmatically sound way all things poker and gamblin then you should not buy the book. Nor should you buy HPFAP, the theory of poker, or any other sklansky book. To even suggest that he would put out a book that was logically or fundamentally unsound speaks to your immaturity as a poker player. Grow up. No one forced him to share his views.

[jwvdcw]

[ QUOTE ]
don't want to waste my money on concepts that he cannot even apply himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why on earth does this matter? If he writes about good stuff that will help someone's game, but for whatever reason he doesn't have the discipline/patience/mental capabilities to carry them out for himself, does that make his advice any worse?

[Ray Zee]

david plays in few tournaments yet does quite well. he is one of the few i would definitely take a piece of, if offered. you would have a bigger ev with david than most of those big names that win a bunch, because they enter every event.

[adios]

The book is excellent FWIW. A couple of nuggets in there have really helped me in NLH tourneys.

[Kevin]

I think that I remember reading in Doyle's intro for High Low games in S/S that David finished second to Doyle in the Stud High/Low WSOP final (circa '76/77), but I could be mistaken