so I don't know, this is a guess, barely a qualified guess, I can easily be totally wrong.

He isn't getting anywhere close to being competitive in no limit or plo under any circumstances.

What's more interesting is a question how would he fare in a brand new game and if he was younger. Based on the way people speak about him, I'd venture to guess that he'd learn a brand new game faster than basically anyone else, maybe barring isildur.

How does aces do in each position when three bots are playing? Kings? If both combined average up ten big blinds, it basically would mean that a good player who threw away all other hands would lose about 40 big blinds per 100 since it would get one or the other almost one in a hundred hands and would lose 50bb with no rake if it folded everything. Assuming the other players hadn't deduced that strategy. Add in QQ and JJ and we might be down to 35 The next best 132 combinations might average a win against even elites of 2 big blinds profit. If so we are down to 15. The next 132 might get it down to 12.5. Thats the gist of what I was getting at.

I have a problem with the forum software. It won't let me Ignore this Sklansky clown.

feel like if you aren’t winning at 500 or higher you aren’t qualified for this discussion

Everyone should read the Michael Craig book The Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King: Inside the Richest Poker Game of All Time. Andy Beal, a billionaire banker and polymath took on the best players in Vegas at the time. Sort of held his own and made them sweat because of the ultra high stakes, but in the end he lost millions. The players he played against included Doyle Brunson, Chip Reese, Ted Forest, and Phil Ivey.

How about players have to choose one of their two cards to turn face up after the flop bet is complete?

Dude have some respect.

Although Sklansky might not be up to date with the current poker climate he is an absolute LEGEND of poker. We're lucky to have him on this site, even if it's just for nostalgic purposes. He's super intelligent even if he is not as clear as he could be sometimes

Meanwhile I remember you doing play and explains 2 years ago at 25nl, which is basically akin to a toddler rehearsing Shakespeare.

Stay in your lane.

Also, please let me know if you want to compare graphs. I'm sure you have a losing redline and a sub 49 WWSF.

In line with some of my other posts I ask:

Did Limitless fold more hands preflop against Stephen than he would for the same money against someone he thought was his equal? If he didn't it means that his EV was worse than it had to be.

it's online bruh, there's huds. you can't just fold more preflop and hope you lose less vs really good regs over extended periods of time

Sklansky is playing 1/2 live my dude. Tell him to stay in his lane

I think G Yakobishvilli's 2023 results can help answer this question if what I've heard about him is right: that he's some rich rec that studies

I don't have a DB of the guy obviously or looked into how he plays other than seen a few hh, but that description seems accurate based on the exhibited skill level in the hh I've seen. Idk if he'd be good enough to beat 200nl or 25nl or whatever, no idea

Anyway over 87k hands he's losing -11bb/100 all in adj to the nosebleed guys according to smarthand. Still a small sample but it's a start

Plus their are other issues with him that probably aren't appropriate to discuss in this forum

I have no idea if Limitless folded more preflop, but he definitely folded more overall!

Stefans graph:

He was playing 1/2 live for his book, he can beat higher. It's live poker, everyone is awful.

He has done more for poker than you or me will do in our lifetimes. He MADE this forum and a created lot of the terminology we use today. Sklansky walked so that others could fly.

It doesn't even matter if you and AlanBostick think you are better than him at poker, he helped each of you learn the game, even if it was indirectly. Calling him a clown and saying you want to block him on the forum he made (and sold) is out of line.

There's no problem with disagreeing, in fact, disagreement is good because it helps people see both sides of the argument. But there's ways to go about it.

There’s no amount of hours hard work study that will turn you into elite player if you are born average brain.

Only people who sell courses say this.

Variance + Linus not playing at his best is the reason he had this graph.

How can you imagine Linus was a “average 1/2 player” who study a lot and turned into the best in the world because he love studying ? I mean, lol come on.

Btw maybe he was trying to play his best… every top player has his own growth learning. Nadal hit his peak at 20, djkokvic hit his peak at 24. And who is the goat…

From the screenshots posted at monthly thread he looks like a fish.

Dont really get why you guys push for him being a recreational. He plays hu and 3handed with elite regs and is opensitting occasionally. There is no recs opensitting in 2024 lol. Clearly he is not as strong as the guy he plays 3handed, but it says something if the table doesn't fill.

Dont feel super comfortable rating him after just a few thousand hands. But he is much better than any nl500 reg thats for sure.

Strange how strongly you argue against Saulo when last year you thought the same thing as him



https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...&postcount=522

Obviously quite the difference between 6h and 3h, in 6h you get way less in spots /100h hands (especially without a rec involved). Also in more spots than 3h the ranges are tighter (more narrow) and it's more cooler vs cooler, less room for small errors/****ing up frequencies/exploiting etc.

although it's an interesting discussion aswell. I once asked a hs reg if I can play 6h midstakes with reg line up with 6bb rake and be profitable and he told me ez game. But I tend to agree with Saulo and George it's just paying rake.

Thank you for making this post DDP. It tilts me so hard when borderline trolls think it is cool to trash all-time greats whose primes were in a completely different era. David Sklansky revolutionized the game of poker and sold us his knowledge for chump change in the form of his high quality books. He can say/do whatever the hell he wants without losing "status". Why? Because he is David ****ing Sklansky. That is why.

"Mickey Mantle sucked. He wouldn't even bat .200 if you put him up against today's pitchers!" Gotta love these idiots.

its always fun to see what triggers someone to post their first post

interesting convo tho

Saulo said in one of his shorts that he feels very very comfortable playing against any line up

I dont think he has a winrate playing nosebleed 50/100 games etc or maybe he does

either way if he did play 3 handed vs linus and stefan, anyone care to guess if he would hold his own and be maybe -2bb loser or closer to getting sorta rekt at around -6bb+

Rekt imo and the stupid thing is that it shouldn’t even be considered an insult.

Saolo has a big stable. If his partners really believe that, they can put their best horse/founder in these games. I am pretty sure people are willing to take side bets and he can make a profit from side bets if the horse/founder will not get ''destroyed''. I am not even sure what destroyed means. Is losing 5bb/100 destroyed? I am sure there will be a line that all parties are willing to take. I would bet a 500nl reg will lose over 5bb/100 in a 3handed game against Linus+Stefan in 50k+ hand sample

They need to find a way for the game to be 3 handed and stacks reset at 120bb-130bb eff to reduce standard deviation of playing 200bb+ deep

the test would be most fair if linus and stefan played in a 500nl rake structure which is what the 500nl reg would be most used to playing

would they agree to this?

imo "destroyed" means losing at 8bb or more

losing at 5bb is like to me them doing better than expected

I think pretty much everyone so far (except saulo right?) is in wide agreement the 500nl guy would have no ****ing chance at losing less than 4bb