Which one of these is the most true?

Each one of the statements in the poll below comes from a well-respected pro-players book. Which do you think is the MOST true?

Wow nice poll. Had me staring for a minute. FWIW I went #3 but there is definitely merit in all of them. Keen to see and hear other responses.

Nice work.

P.S Who's the author?

based on the poll right now 3 got it but there is truth in all of them. great post i really liked this one.

I didn't reveal who said what, because I thought it might influence people's votes.

I voted, and really it shouldn't even be close as to which is the most important.

Nice poll and for once I was on the majority side

Since it seems we are not going to get more votes on this, here is which player said what.

The first quote was from Cloutier, the second from Brunson, and the third from Sklansky. Oddly, we voted inversely to the success of the players. Sklansky got the most votes, and he is the least successful, TJ was second, and Doyle is the most successful and got no votes at all.

According to whom?

He's probably made more in book sales than on the poker table. It'd be an interesting graph to see between the three. Both things being considered.

I voted for #1...but after reading all posts and rethinking it, I really like #2. Don't know if I would change my vote, But I like it!

I voted #3 ,but in all honesty I find truth in all of the choices. That said I think if you practice 3 to it's utmost you will be utilizing 1 & 2 more often than not .

Great poll thanks for sharing

Doyle has 10 WSOP bracelets, 31 in the money, and two main event wins.

TJ has 6 bracelts, 23 in the money, and came in second in the main event twice.

Sklansky has 3 bracelts (none for Hold 'Em), 21 in the money, and his highest main event finish was 23rd.

I'm with the majority, #3, but #2 isn't far behind. I guess you could say that you have to know when to lay down what you think is the best hand, but my answer would have to be "rarely", very rarely.

So you base Poker success solely on No Limit Hold'em tournament results? That is certainly your perogative, I don't.

While i agree that Brunson can be ranked higher then Sklansky as a player it seems u fail to take cash games into consideration(rightly so since there much more hard to track).
Also why does it matter that Sklansky braclets came from non-NL events?
Just makes him look a well rounded player imo since he is obvs. no noob at NL thou he doesnt have the braclets to show for it.
Even thou tournaments are great and all that they arnt they best way to determine a players true ability since very few players ever reach the real "long term" in them imo.

I think that, for me at least, the first concept is the most important. I get married to too many of my hands when I feel like I have the best hand even when my gut is telling me I am beat, which sometimes causes me to over play my hand and, sometimes, lose a bunch of chips...

There is no question that they are all great players. And there are many ways to figure out how to measure who has had more success. But WSOP bracelets are a good measure, and main event finishes are another good measure. Face it, that main event win is the most coveted prize in poker.

I'd be interested to know, Steveg, by what measures can you claim that the success of these three players should be ranked in a different order than I have done?

sindri, Doyle is famous for playing successfully on a regular basis in the biggest cash game in the world. He is generally recognized as the best cash game player in the world. TJ is generally recognized as the most successful tournament player in the world.

When Poker After Dark had Legends Week, Sklansky wasn't even at the table with TJ and Doyle.

The reason I think Sklansky's non-Hold 'Em bracelets mean less is because Hold 'Em is the main game now. To me, Sklansky's wins in Draw and Omaha demonstrate archaic talents rather than contemporary talent. Like being really good at hula-hoop.

First, full disclosure, I don't follow the pros carefully or very much at all other than to recognize maybe 10 on site and I could tell you how many bracelets maybe two have. Who is the best is a boring topic because the edge they all hold over each other is very slim. Some have had more financial and personal success than others but skill wise it is close to a wash for the most part.

I would judge Sklanksy the most succesful without knowing any results or anything based solely on the opinion that his peers hold of his knowledge of the game of poker.

To me it is the same a someone like Micheal Jordan, you don't have to know that he won 6 championships to know he is one of the greatest to have ever played the game. All you have to do is listen the way his peers talk about him and his game.