sklansky responds to daniel's challenge

[captnwmkidd 0]

David Sklansky old hand Reged: 08/28/02 Posts: 841 Re: Negreanu Challenges Sklansky 05/02/05 06:21 PM Edit Reply Quote Last post on this subject:1. Daniel didn't mention a qualifier. I suspected it was an oversight but wasn't sure. Hi-Lo without a qualifier is still sometimes played and it is the game my chapter is about in Doyle's first book. I believe it is the best poker chapter ever written and so do many others. So I thought Daniel might like the idea of playing the guy who even Doyle considers the authority on the subject.2. I have virtually no experience heads up. Daniel should be a small favorite over me in the less technical games. In the more technical games such as single draw lowball, game theory should negate any psychological edge he might have.3. For me to flip a coin for 100K someone would have to lay me 130-100.4. I have to retract my earlier statement that extra publicity would make a close gamble worth it to me. That is still true. The problem is that it would be inappropriate for me to do something that the Wynn hotel could use for their benefit. Nothing at all against them. It's just that the Bellagio has generously let their casino be the one to put my game WPT All IN HOLDEM on their floor for the Nevada Gaming Commission's 90 day trial. So it would be extremely ungrateful for me to be a major part of any media event for a different hotel. Had that not slipped my mind, I wouldn't have even made my original offer.5. I am willing to play the follwing headup game with Daniel if it is not used to publicize a non MGM hotel. Stud 8/B. $200 ante, $300 bring in. $500-$1000, $40,000 freezeout. He lays me 50,000 to 40,000. I have no reason to think he would take this deal but it is definite on my part. If he wants to double the stakes I expect I can sell half of myself. I offer this proposition only to set in stone a game that I would absolutely play. That doesn't mean I wouldn't entertain other propositions. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: I believe the ball is in Daniel's court now :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

[Vade 0]

FYI, you put Sklansky accepts David's challengeWTF

[cdddc75 0]

I believe the ball is in Daniel's court now

Not really. Daniel's open challenge is more than fair, especially with the 1.1 to 1 odds offered to David.David's terms aren't really close. They make him look willing to compromise while having no serious intention of making this match happen.

[Absolute 0]

Daniel won't accept this offer.David is being fairly unreasonable here. (And I am quite the fan of David Sklansky)First off, Daniel is simply doing his job by trying to get some high stakes action at the Wynn. His challenge is to all players and he excludes no one from any of the games he listed.For David to be asked to lay 1.3 to 1 is outrageous.For David to suggest this be played at the Bellagio is even more outrageous.Also, Daniel's range of challenges was from 100K to 500K. I don't think this was negotiable for a challenge that wouldn't even take place at the Wynn.So, here is what David wants.He wants to get laid better odds.He wants to cut down the minimum challenge offer by half.He wants to change the venue.He wants to play the game where he has the most significant edge.Never. Gonna. Happen.

[captnwmkidd 0]

Vade, the reason for the heading being worded the way it was is because he didn't accept the challenge. He responded to it. If he would have accepted it, we wouldnt betalking about this, we would be clearing our calenders so we could watch.I agree absolute, they are too far apart for it to happen. But they both have good points. Both have loyalty issues with their casinos. David didnt say he wanted 1.3 to 1 on his game, just all the rest except his game, and Daniel said he could choose. Daniel is doing an excellent job with this, it will promote the Wynn out the Wazooooo.I like em both and just wish we could see the two sit down and play cards

[gobears 0]

Vade, the reason for the heading being worded the way it was is because he didn't accept the challenge. He responded to it. If he would have accepted it, we wouldnt betalking about this, we would be clearing our calenders so we could watch.I agree absolute, they are too far apart for it to happen. But they both have good points. David didnt say he wanted 1.3 to 1 on his game, just all the rest except his game, and Daniel said he could choose. Daniel is doing an excellent job with this, it will promote the Wynn out the Wazooooo.I like em both and just wish we could see the two sit down and play cards

I thought that David wants Daniel to lay $50K to his $40K, that's 1.25 to 1

[captnwmkidd 0]

You are right, I stand corrected.My apologies.But Sklansky did say that is not the only offer he would accept. He said he would entertain other offers from Daniel. but alas, it may never materlize.So, lets move on............Who do you think will accept it????His bud's shouldE-DogHarmanIvey

[LAPoker 0]

You are right, I stand corrected.My apologies.I forgot he put that in there because he says he has vvirtually no heads up experience.So, lets move on............Who do you think will accept it????His bud's shouldE-DogHarmanIvey

I think Johnny Chan will, and Daniel might be in a bit of trouble with that one. I am also concidering the challange, but I need to find some spare change, digging through the couch now to see what I can come up with.

[clashcityrocker 0]

Vade, the reason for the heading being worded the way it was is because he didn't accept the challenge. He responded to it. If he would have accepted it, we wouldnt betalking about this, we would be clearing our calenders so we could watch.I agree absolute, they are too far apart for it to happen. But they both have good points. Both have loyalty issues with their casinos. David didnt say he wanted 1.3 to 1 on his game, just all the rest except his game, and Daniel said he could choose. Daniel is doing an excellent job with this, it will promote the Wynn out the Wazooooo.I like em both and just wish we could see the two sit down and play cards

I think what Vade was getting at was that it should be 'Sklansky responds to Daniel's challenge'?

[Vade 0]

Indeed :snooty:

[deviper 0]

David Sklansky old hand Reged: 08/28/02 Posts: 841 Re: Negreanu Challenges Sklansky 05/02/05 06:21 PM Edit Reply Quote Last post on this subject:1. Daniel didn't mention a qualifier. I suspected it was an oversight but wasn't sure. Hi-Lo without a qualifier is still sometimes played and it is the game my chapter is about in Doyle's first book. I believe it is the best poker chapter ever written and so do many others. So I thought Daniel might like the idea of playing the guy who even Doyle considers the authority on the subject.2. I have virtually no experience heads up. Daniel should be a small favorite over me in the less technical games. In the more technical games such as single draw lowball, game theory should negate any psychological edge he might have.3. For me to flip a coin for 100K someone would have to lay me 130-100.4. I have to retract my earlier statement that extra publicity would make a close gamble worth it to me. That is still true. The problem is that it would be inappropriate for me to do something that the Wynn hotel could use for their benefit. Nothing at all against them. It's just that the Bellagio has generously let their casino be the one to put my game WPT All IN HOLDEM on their floor for the Nevada Gaming Commission's 90 day trial. So it would be extremely ungrateful for me to be a major part of any media event for a different hotel. Had that not slipped my mind, I wouldn't have even made my original offer.5. I am willing to play the follwing headup game with Daniel if it is not used to publicize a non MGM hotel. Stud 8/B. $200 ante, $300 bring in. $500-$1000, $40,000 freezeout. He lays me 50,000 to 40,000. I have no reason to think he would take this deal but it is definite on my part. If he wants to double the stakes I expect I can sell half of myself. I offer this proposition only to set in stone a game that I would absolutely play. That doesn't mean I wouldn't entertain other propositions. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: I believe the ball is in Daniel's court now :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

wat do these things mean

[captnwmkidd 0]

LOLYou mean because I capatilized the words?LOLummm..my apologies for that also

[SiliconSlim 0]

3. For me to flip a coin for 100K someone would have to lay me 130-100. He lays me 50,000 to 40,000.wat do these things mean

That Sklansky's using new math?

[Smasharoo 0]

That Sklansky's using new math?It's you not being able to read for comprehention.David is saying that he thinks he's a slight favorite at Stud Hi/Lo and thus can take 1.25 instead of the 1.3 he'd need for a coinflip.It's pretty clear he picked a highly technical game with more complete information where an edge of any kind would be miniscule for two players playing fundementally correct technically.Laying 1.25 to 1 in the format he describes, particularly the light ante structure would be just about impossible to overcome.Of course, it's still a one shot deal. It'd be even worse if David had proposed 10 $4,000 to $5,000 freezouts, so I guess that's his idea of coming halfway

[SiliconSlim 0]

It's you not being able to read for comprehention.

I'm not sure what "comprehention" is, so yes, I don't read for it. :)Now get off Sklansky's dick and learn to read a poker book.

[SapphireTiger 0]

LOLYou mean because I capatilized the words?LOLummm..my apologies for that also

okay. like many others in this forum, i have to spell this out for you.You entitled this thread "Sklansky Responds to David's Challenge."You mixed up David with Daniel.UNDERSTAND?

[Smasharoo 0]

Now get off Sklansky's dick and learn to read a poker book.What in the world are you talking about?Sorry your time at the Ray Charles Reading Academy didn't go that well.

[Mr Monkey 0]

Now get off Sklansky's dick and learn to read a poker book.What in the world are you talking about?Sorry your time at the Ray Charles Reading Academy didn't go that well.

lol

[captnwmkidd 0]

Listen Skeeter,I missed it. You got me. I screwed up. You are right and I am wrong. To take something that is funny because i missed it and try and twist it into something more profound, only shows your deep seeded anger and lack of patience. I am quite capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time. I appreciate you pointing it out where I was in error, as I didn't get it when the other gentleman tried to explain it. But if someone would have said I was using the first and last name of same person in subject head, I woulda got it.While again, I appreciate the info, the matter in which you presented it shows your lack of class.

[Smasharoo 0]

While again, I appreciate the info, the matter in which you presented it shows your lack of class.Well thank god you're not an overly sensative big quivverring pussy about it.

[SapphireTiger 0]

Listen Skeeter,I missed it. You got me. I screwed up. You are right and I am wrong. To take something that is funny because i missed it and try and twist it into something more profound, only shows your deep seeded anger and lack of patience. I am quite capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time. I appreciate you pointing it out where I was in error, as I didn't get it when the other gentleman tried to explain it. But if someone would have said I was using the first and last name of same person in subject head, I woulda got it.While again, I appreciate the info, the matter in which you presented it shows your lack of class.

i don't deny i have deep seeded anger or a lack of patience right now. i don't care if i'm showing a lack of class. but i don't think my post shows any of those things. i pointed out your mistake because you weren't getting any of the explanations that others gave you and obviously i succeeded and whose to say you would have gotten it if i described it in any other way. I was as clear as I could be and that's it.

[captnwmkidd 0]

LOLYou make fun of me, then say I'm overly sensitive ??LOLWOWI can laugh at myself as well as anyone, but I usually reserve the right to make fun of someone with the people I know. I would never do it to a stranger. ITs not a joke if both parties don't get it.It just takes a few posts guys to maybe understand your sense of humor. SO, maybe in the future, if you don't want someone being "overly sensitive" you could give them a wink or something while you jab em in the side.You may get a better response.

[Smasharoo 0]

Hi, I never made fun of you. Learn to read. ITs not a joke if both parties don't get it. Jesus, you've never heard a joke?

[captnwmkidd 0]

Mon, May 2nd, 2005 3:42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- captnwmkidd wrote: LOL You mean because I capatilized the words? LOL ummm..my apologies for that also okay. like many others in this forum, i have to spell this out for you. You entitled this thread "Sklansky Responds to David's Challenge." You mixed up David with Daniel. UNDERSTAND? LOLDegrading, pompous, and basically just down right silly.Cry me a river. If this is your way of spelling it out for me, I'll bet you have great interpersonal relationships. Anyways, We have just spent 15 minutes of both of our times that we will never get back, so lets move on, shall wee?

[Guest Anonymous]

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: I believe the ball is in Daniel's court now :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:**** this old ****, he can suck dan's d!ck. who the **** is he to go changin shit up?