daniel at 2+2

[SapphireTiger 0]

seriously. guess what. i bet you a very high percentage of the winning players on this site read Sklansky religiously. If you or anyone else who reads Sklansky is losing, it's not becuase Sklansky is wrong, but it's because they are applying it wrong.

[SOWhatKid 0]

Man, Kid, you're a fool. How old are the kids you play with that own Sklansky's book? Theory of Poker (the book you're talking about? or THFAP?) is full of brilliant insight. If applied properly, there's not much else to know about the game.Ice

How am I a fool by telling you a fact everyone who has one of his books is a losing player? The players I play with are 18-26 years old. I think these players are alot like Skalansky and have no backbone their not real players no feel for the game.

[SapphireTiger 0]

Man, Kid, you're a fool. How old are the kids you play with that own Sklansky's book? Theory of Poker (the book you're talking about? or THFAP?) is full of brilliant insight. If applied properly, there's not much else to know about the game.Ice

How am I a fool by telling you a fact everyone who has one of his books is a losing player? The players I play with are 18-26 years old. I think these players are alot like Skalansky and have no backbone their not real players no feel for the game.

You're a fool because that's not a fact.

[SOWhatKid 0]

seriously. guess what. i bet you a very high percentage of the winning players on this site read Sklansky religiously. If you or anyone else who reads Sklansky is losing, it's not becuase Sklansky is wrong, but it's because they are applying it wrong.

It's possible but I just haven't seen any proof

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

He's only smart.. he's a very, very very shrewd gambler, very very very good at assessing if he has and edge.. and honest with himself about that edge. He doesn't play in games where he's not a favorite, what's wrong with that? His initail respondse to Daniel's challenge was rediculous, how ever. It just makes him look foolish and absurd. If he had no intention of accepting Daniel's challenge, then he never should have said anything in the first play, rather than make all these absurd stipulations on the challenge. I don't blame DS for not wanting to play DN heads up, and for wanting the best possible edge if they do play..

[ArseneLupin3 0]

oh my god that thread makes them look like the biggest poker pussies ever. it says a lot that those guys cant find any backers, assuming they are even trying. YOU JUST PLAY THE ****ING GAME!!Then you will see who is better! The winner has all the money.... Sklansky pisses me off with all this crap.He sounds like a 10 year old trying to come up with excuses for why his homework isn't done. He is all math, no instinct he is not even a poker player IMOSkalansky sucks! sorry but keep reading his garbageI don't really care about the challenge it's just fact Skalanski is all talk his results definetely don't back up his mouth

I'd rather be a pussy than be someone who made any of the above statements. And if you're going to insult the man with incidental evidence while spelling his name wrong, at least spell his name consistently the same way ;)Seriously, what is up with you guys? You're reaching absurd conclusions about people based on online posts. Read the troll threads on 2+2 where 2 posters criticize greg raymer for not playing in a $50k tourney to see some examples of where this argument of needing to have consistently large testicles fails. Also, if you plan to criticize someone, your arguments are a lot better when they don't resort to name-calling as a primary means of debate.

What the hell is the Wynn Factor?? Honestly... this guy is such a puss I can't even believe it.

This has already been discussed elsewhere on these forums and is easily explained by Sklansky's stating that Daniel is "being laid a price." Yes, Daniel has established that he's putting up all the money for these matches, but he's also getting paid an undefined by probably large sum for his services in general. If he earns a point commission on the room's profits or has even discussed marketing/planning these matches with anyone at Wynn this is even more apparent.

"I won't risk 100,000 dollars as a 52% favorite." Who said he was a 52% favorite?

52% is an example or perhaps an estimate, but the number itself is irrelevant. Is your name EV-man or evman as in Evan? If it's the former, you should understand that risking a large amount of one's net worth as a small favorite, while profitable in terms of the long term, will cost a lot more in the short term if better investments of ones time and capital are available. If this reminds you of money managemenent and the stock market, it should. Some people don't like risking large sums of money on coinflips. The edge in a headsup limit match among players at this level cannot be very large. Why flip coins for 100 large? If refusing to do so makes one a pussy, so be it. I'll take the low road, I guess. You learn a lot less, risk a lot more, and make it easier to develop serious psychological issues with gambling when you do brash things like this.

sklansky is such a coward, he can rationalize not playing daniel any way he wants but the bottom line is, hes scared. period, end of discussion.

Yes. Your subjective opinion is the end to all arguments. Congratulations!

Basically if you want to make a living in poker play someone who reads this guys books easy money

Maybe your friends are illiterate..? Read the mid/high posts from the guys who have moved from 10/20 to 100/200+ successfully in 5 years or less. There is a reason that after super system, the original version of which is largely Poker Philosophy as opposed to theory, theory of poker is the most commonly cited work by winning players. Yes, it has flaws.

The players I play with are 18-26 years old.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!! I rarely feel the need so laugh out of insolence while writing a post, but your arguments combined with this quote pretty much sum up the size of the grain of salt with which your words are being taken by the smarter posters here (a class of which I assure you I am NOT a member). Do you play mostly no-limit, perchance?Crap, I just broke my own rule of assumption.-adam

[GT123 0]

I think I have already said this if you play like skalansky you will be eaten alive seriously. He is all math, no instinct he is not even a poker player IMO

you're wrong.

Skalansky sucks! sorry but keep reading his garbage

Go to this link and you will know why you are a idiot SOWHATKID.http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...opic.php?t=1184

[bobbywithani 0]

Every week there is some kid on here that says Skalansky sucks. I really don't get it. How can you say he is a losing player when he has been winning at all different forms gambling for years?

[theStork 0]

i doubt sklansky is as good as he thinks he is. however, he and dn have the same number of wsop bracelets, whatever that means.

[Cerril 0]

I went over there expecting to see some of the usual posturing and otherwise talking about high volatility players like DN - what I saw was Sklansky basically saying that he doesn't have enough money to take a bet like this where he'd only be a small favorite after the break he's getting. Sure, you might believe that Daniel's far and away better at even S&M's best games but you certainly can't fault them for disagreeing or estimating their skills higher.Keep in mind too that pretty much everything these guys do keeps the long run in mind. These are -not- gamblers in your traditional sense, they won't take a coin flip for half their bankroll, even getting offered better than even odds. On the other hand, Daniel -is- a gambler. Look at his log and even this challenge, he's willing to be a dog just to get action at a level that matters to him, and he'll bet even when he's not sure about the edge, though the cash in those cases is smaller.It's not a surprise that these two wouldn't want to go up against someone as hot as DN, in Malmuth's case at all (and he says he's sure he wouldn't be a favorite) and in Sklansky's case not without an edge and an amount that he can afford.

[NickTheKid 0]

Poker isn't a dick measuring contest, it's for money. I respect the candor of Sklansky and do find this whole challenge silly.

[SOWhatKid 0]

The players I play with are 18-26 years old.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!! I rarely feel the need so laugh out of insolence while writing a post, but your arguments combined with this quote pretty much sum up the size of the grain of salt with which your words are being taken by the smarter posters here (a class of which I assure you I am NOT a member). Do you play mostly no-limit, perchance?Crap, I just broke my own rule of assumption.look guy you need to learn how to read cause the person previously asked me a question I answered. As far as no limit I play it but it's not my best game STUD is my best game so bad assumption. As for Skalanski he has no backbone you can look for his results here on the web. I doubt he is even a winning player. I will concede he is a great limit hold em player but other than that he is pretty laughable.

[SOWhatKid 0]

I think I have already said this if you play like skalansky you will be eaten alive seriously. He is all math' date=' no instinct he is not even a poker player IMO[/quote']you're wrong.

Skalansky sucks! sorry but keep reading his garbage

Go to this link and you will know why you are a idiot SOWHATKID.http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...opic.php?t=1184[/quotewow that proved it! lol a book review ]

[SOWhatKid 0]

I think I have already said this if you play like skalansky you will be eaten alive seriously. He is all math' date=' no instinct he is not even a poker player IMO[/quote']you're wrong.

Skalansky sucks! sorry but keep reading his garbage

Go to this link and you will know why you are a idiot SOWHATKID.http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...opic.php?t=1184[/quotewow that proved it! lol a book review need someone else to have an opinion for you

[SOWhatKid 0]

i doubt sklansky is as good as he thinks he is. however, he and dn have the same number of wsop bracelets, whatever that means.

yep he is all mouth no results. He has the biggest mouth of any player including Hellmuth yet his results aren't sensational as his mouth would suggest.

[Suited_Up 2]

i doubt sklansky is as good as he thinks he is. however, he and dn have the same number of wsop bracelets, whatever that means.

yep he is all mouth no results. He has the biggest mouth of any player including Hellmuth yet his results aren't sensational as his mouth would suggest.

Not sure what this means, but you aren't helping your argument.

[TheShootah 0]

The players I play with are 18-26 years old.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!! I rarely feel the need so laugh out of insolence while writing a post, but your arguments combined with this quote pretty much sum up the size of the grain of salt with which your words are being taken by the smarter posters here (a class of which I assure you I am NOT a member). Do you play mostly no-limit, perchance?Crap, I just broke my own rule of assumption.look guy you need to learn how to read cause the person previously asked me a question I answered. As far as no limit I play it but it's not my best game STUD is my best game so bad assumption. As for Skalanski he has no backbone you can look for his results here on the web. I doubt he is even a winning player. I will concede he is a great limit hold em player but other than that he is pretty laughable.

I don't post on here that much, basically because of shitheads like you. I really only post when I think someone needs to be corrected, and you are the lucky winner. The man you quoted has posted just about everything that needs to be said. I would like you to find me a page on the web like you quoted that shows Sklansky is not a winning player. It's pretty well known that he beats 300-600 Hold Em games, and is an expert on pretty much every form of poker. my favorite part is when you acknowledge that he is a great limit Hold Em player, and then go on to say that you doubt he is a winning player. As far as tournament poker goes, he has the same number of bracelets as Daniel, and his recent firsts in two of the PSII sngs, the winner of the "Poker by the Book" WPT, moneying in the WPT Championship, and coming in 6th in a bigger tourney at the Mirage also speaks for themselves. I don't think anyone would respect his books, especially Daniel, if he wasn't a winning player. I think you are an egotistical ignoramus, that either hangs out with similar folk, or illiterates. Anyone that reads Sklansky's books (and I hope you realize that it is Sklansky and not "Skalanski"), will be a winner in the long run. I would really like to see you take on some of the players in the Stud forum (since that is, of course, your best game) in a heads up match, or even just sit with them at a ring game and try to hold your head above water). I am actually surprised you haven't mention the fact that Sklansky, Malmuth, and Ray Zee have written the best book on Stud ever. And no, Adam's, West's, and certainly not Warren's books come even close. As for Sklansky having no backbone, that is a pretty big opinion. Realize that he is in poker for the money. That is his job. He isn't a gambler. If he doesn't want to take the challenge, then so be it. What about all the pros that aren't taking his challenge that aren't saying anything? They catch no flack whatsoever. As far as the challenges go, I think they are somewhat childish. Why Daniel chose to walk into the 2+2 forums and taunt Slansky and Mason is beyond me. It seems like deep down something really bothers Daniel about the two. Can you really fault anyone for not wanting to unneccessarily risk large sums of money on virtual coin flips? I think it shows a certain patience to put up with this crap anyway. It seems like if Daniel really wanted to just play poker heads up with people, he didn't need to spread all this shit about it online all over the place. I am pretty sure he could have just talked to these people over the phone, over e-mail, or in person. It seems like a "coincidence" to me that as soon as he is playing exclusively at the Wynn, that these challenges start. This is the Wynn Factor that Sklansky mentioned: He brings up a buzz about it, and he recieves some cash to play or whatnot. Anyway, I really hope that you realize pretty much everything you have posted in this thread is flaming shit, and that with every post you write, you lose respect and credibility to anyone capable of intelligent thought.

[allinbluff35 0]

to the above poster, paragraphs are your friend

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

And all you can say is "paragraphs are your friend.." I hope you get hit by a bus...this guy said it all, Sklansky is a expert player.. and he is a gambler.. he's just a very, very smart gambler, who doesn't like to take risks. Daniel likes to take risk. That's what it comes down to. just because you're a slightly worse player poker player than DN, doesn't mean that you're a shitty play that's won no money, and done nothing... go to the Bellagio some time, and watch Sklansky wipe the floor with the 300-600 game... Sklansky just picks his games very, very well. Why would he risk 100,000 playing a world class player, when he can make 800 dollars an hour playing softer players... Now, have alot of players read a Sklansky book or two, and think that they know a hand value chart that this should be a magic guide to winning? Yes. Do alot of these players play tight weak? Yes? are alot suspecible to takeing bad beats, adn going on tilt and not know why they suck? Yes...... It's not Sklansky's fault that alot of people have neither the brain power nor the patientce to actually learn and practice what he's talking about in his books.

[na3r0k 0]

Well first off i wanted to say I tried to read the forums in 2+2, but serriously the layout in there is so crappy i took about a 2 min look, b4 i got sick of clicking the links and then hiting the back button, yea you could call me lazy, it still is a crappy layout.Anyway, I really don't think sklansky is a bad player, and he does have some decent books. However I do see a lot of people backing him and i really don't understand why. I said it on a previous thread, that if you're gonna call someone a dog in all his matches at least have to balls to prove it. If you're not confident in your own ability to beat the guy you're ragging on don't do it in the first place... OMG It's that simple!!!! BTW DN did reply in the previous thread with this incase people forgot.

Guys, I jsut thought the post was funny. If you read the way it was written it was written in the tone of an infommercial. I know there is like zero chance one of those guys would play me. They enjoy yapping, but they simply don't put their money where their mouth is.They talk a good game, but in fact they do an even better job of saving face. The way they handle the offers is very telling I think. Smart businessmen for sure, but these guys are not high stakes poker players.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

But I wouldn't call it middle limit. DN ia better than DS.. so what.. that just makes DS smart for not taking the gamble. Knowing your limitations, and game selection are key things great poker players have.

[HoosierAlum 0]

Can someone please post a link to the aforementioned 2+2 discussion?Thanks.

[obs 0]

Sklansky simply won't risk this much money on a single freezout. Even if he feels he has a very slight edge.

[Suited_Up 2]

Sklansky simply won't risk this much money on a single freezout. Even if he feels he has a very slight edge.

Then he didn't need to say anything at all.Doesn't anyone see this point? He brought it on himself. Should have just kept his mouth shut. If he doesn't want to play, just don't accept it, like a ton of other players did. Instead he made up a long winded excuse with his fancy numbers and who is an underdog... well you can't decide who the underdog is until you've already played. You can't just guess! Also, there is no Wynn factor. So he is making money from them? Well sklansky makes money from his books... it's like saying you won't play him, because he has an edge in the books market and can afford more than you because of it.It's all stupid, and if they don't want to play DN... then just shutup and don't play... but there is no need to do all this talking. DN has all the right in the world to go make fun of them now, because they brought up a bunch of crap that really doesn't matter. It's like court, if you open the door to something, I can walk right in. Should have just kept it to themselves. If they don't have the money... maybe they're doing something wrong.

[ArseneLupin3 0]

I don't post on here that much, basically because of censored like you. I really only post when I think someone needs to be corrected, and you are the lucky winner. The man you quoted has posted just about everything that needs to be said.

Shootah, we all know that tournament poker is the only form played for high stakes -adam