And as for Doyle...he's just like Matusow, total ESTP. His game is based totally on awareness of present-moment personal dynamics, not long term averages of all possible plays. (Listen to Doyle vs. Dwan discussing hands and reads if you want a great example of the S vs. N dichotomy on these perspectives.)
Look at the way Doyle will make plays like cold call a preflop raise with KK and then call down two or three barrels. Deeper chip stacks, as in a cash game, favor N players because the Sensor's "right now" read stands to lose more on the occasions when it's wrong. Doyle's strategy in deep stack cash is deliberately directed at minimizing pot size and taking advantage of overly aggressive players by snapping off 2- and 3-barrels. And he's really
good at it.
If you've read his book Super/System
, you'll know that he gained prominence in a time when cash games were played with much smaller stacks, and now he doesn't win nearly as much as he used to since the huge rash of extremely mathematical N-type internet players started to take over the scene, and both cash game and tournament stacks got much deeper in most games. "It's like playing against a computer," he says. How telling.
An N player can't hone in on the exact specifics of the current hand as well, and so good S players actually have stronger overall reads
...but N players make up for this with a broader contextual understanding of average hand ranges by studying long-term play data. N wonders what the theory says the pieces of information he's given should say about what hands he should
have and how often; S cuts this step out of the process and just reads directly into what he *does* have *this* time.
It's extraordinarily interesting to me how both approaches can produce huge success when used correctly.