David Sklansky is best known as an author of gambling articles and books. However, I suspect he considers himself to be a general thinker for whom gambling problems represent just some of his many interests. He has written articles on diverse subjects including crime and punishment, race relations, and general expertise, and some of these were collected in a previous book called, Fighting Fuzzy Thinking in Poker, Gaming & Life. Written with psychologist and noted poker author in his own right, Alan Schoonmaker, DUCY? uses diverse subjects to illustrate many techniques that may be used to approach problems in an unorthodox way.

After Schoonmaker’s introduction, the book begins with a comparatively brief section containing stories that cover many of the ideas Sklansky had while working with the late casino mogul Bob Stupak. The majority of the book contains similarly brief stories about a diverse set of topics, including politics, public health, education, and even parallel parking. I’d say about half of the stories in DUCY? contain some direct gambling aspect, although others also contain some tangential connection to games of chance. The book is not expressly oriented to gambling, and those reading it won’t learn things that directly make them more successful gamblers. Instead the book’s aim is to investigate the thinking process Sklansky uses to arrive at his conclusions.

The book title is an abbreviation Sklansky uses for the question, “Do you see why?” As far as this book goes, Sklansky is less interested in the relative merits of various arguments than the process.

Despite considering such controversial subjects as the death penalty, economics, collateral damage in war, and abortion, the authors express very few opinions on the subjects themselves. Their arguments are often of the form, “If you believe in X, then you must also concede Y,” even if X and Y are often considered by conventional wisdom to be in opposition to each other.

In many cases, I found myself reading Sklansky’s arguments and thinking, “This is a good point, but there’s a lot more to this issue than is considered here.” In one essay Sklansky asks us to not confuse an understanding of the vocabulary of a subject with intelligence. I think this is an excellent point, but at the same time, those with an understanding of these sorts of details can be useful in pointing out some of the problems that come with the “outside the box” thinking used in other essays. That’s okay, though, because the focus of the book is not on the answers but the process by which one comes up with those answers. It’s about encouraging the reader to think through familiar problems in new ways. In these cases, the fact that the new approach may lead to some additional insight is worthwhile, even if such an approach isn’t always effective or even appropriate. Briefly, in DUCY? Sklansky encourages us to add additional tools to our mental toolbox.

I liked this book and recommend it to those who appreciate David Sklansky’s thinking on subjects outside the realm of gambling, and especially to those who enjoyed Fighting Fuzzy Thinking in Poker, Gaming, & Life. The large amount of gambling material in the book makes it more likely to be of interest to those with a foot in the world of casinos, but I expect there will be many people who don’t have a strong interest in gambling who would benefit from it as well.

—Nick Christenson