Jump to content

Cannot Believe They Charge For This!


Recommended Posts

So I needed some light reading for my train journey to work this morning, and so picked up a copy of WPT Poker (£3 WH Smith), not expecting a great deal as most poker mag's tend to be of a low quality, but hoping for a good interiew with Patrik Antonius who was on the cover.Anyway, I turn to page 10 where the $50k HORSE event is described as 'a wild poker variant', and realise I have likely made a more costly mistake than when i call those $4 value bets when i know i'm beat. But i was actually disgusted when confronted with the following 1/2 page article:'Is 7-2 Actually the worst hold-em starting hand?''intro para''But how true is this? How about 6-2 for instance? According to poker statistics software Poker Academy (nice plug), 6-2 is actually worse. Go all-in with 7-2 against a player holding 6-2 and you'll double up 57.3% of the time, chop the pot 18.3%, and go home red-faced and embarrassed just 24.5% of the time.' OMFG - maybe it's the lack of sleep, but jesus, i actually feel dumber for having read this, let alone paying for it. For starters, where do you buy the hole-card cam required to know the only opponent calling you holds 6-2??? Followed by, no sh*** Sherlock, but the whole point of the definition is how the hand fares against random hands in a ring game, not a heads-up match where your opponent is a moron.'The 7-2 myth is so pervasive' gotta interupt here to emphasize the word MYTH, as obviously this so called fact is right up there with the minotaur and the lost city of Atlantis that the hand has become a cult hand. Many players love to bluffwith it just to be able to brag if they win' so maybe that's something i should try doing in my full ring $2-4 limit game... food for thought there...'But its not just 6-2 that the hand comes out tops against' wait, i sense a bombshell coming, one which may rock the core of the avid poker player as much as the ZeeJustin scandal '7-2 is also the favourite to triumph over 2-3, 2-4, 2-5, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, 4-5, 4-6 and 5-6 (all off suit) and will take down 2-3 and 3-4 suited.'How bored / stupid was this writer when he penned this article. How stoned was the editor when he agreed this was something we, the reader, should be aware of. Thank god they told me that 7 high was a favourite against 4 high heads-up all-in. This article is so misguided it makes me wonder what credentials you need to write for WPT magazine. Do you honestly need any poker knowledge at all?'So there you have iot: 7-2 isn't the worst starting hand after all.' Alert the media. Seriously though, this sort of information without any context of the type of game you need to be playing for this type of advice to apply is seriously damaging to the idiots who would buy more than one edition of this magazine. On the other hand, maybe thats a good thing...Sorry for the vent but this annoyed me all day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

-EV on the $4 buy, but if beginner's believe this and take it to the internet, then it could be +EV.I love when these magazines write stupid articles. It creates bad players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the only one worth reading is cardplayer.but then you can get all the useful stuff online...for free. so what would be the point in shelling out for a subscription?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An article of mine is up on pocketfives.com which the WPT editor contacted me asking to license for publishing, so yes, anyone can write for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...