Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

There are no truly advanced poker books.

What I mean by truly advanced is a book that does not copiously waste words explaining concepts that are intuitively obvious to talented players, and instead devotes itself steadfastly to the task of difficult problem-solving.

The serious chess players on here know what I'm talking about. There are literally 100s of advanced chess books, where from page 1 onwards your brain is put to work and it's typically a battle between wanting to continue reading and putting the book down because the author challenges your mind just as a fierce talented opponent does.

Instead, in the poker literature, the so-called advanced literature consists of excessive explanations of intuitive concepts with trivial 1-d examples that seem to have been chosen simply because they were the least work to think up.

Am I accusing poker's so-called advanced authors of intellectual laziness ? Yes, I am, because I think some of these people could do much better.

I agree with BG that most poker books are lame, but BG's book contains only a few well-discussed advanced hands which effectively serve as a tease since most of the book reads like an inane coffee house conversation with your aunt.

Sometimes I wonder if existing established poker authors are capable of writing an advanced book. Sometimes I wonder if most advanced players assume that if they write an advanced book it will serve to lesses their edge over the competition.

And I call bs on the advanced players who wrote totally lame-ass jokes on TP and dare to dump it on the poker-playing public.

Sorry to be so blunt. Maybe Gus' book will go in some small measure to remedy this sorry state of affairs.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe Gus' book will go in some small measure to remedy this sorry state of affairs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I very much doubt the above.

Anyway, I don't know if he still has plans to do it, but a couple of months ago Sklansky was considering doing a book dedicated to analysing hand problems (amongst other book ideas).

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Is it possible that chess style analysis of problems is not relevant to poker because it is not that sort of game? Maybe limit is a bit more like that but it seems to me that NL is only partly maths logic and a whole lot more about playing the person. Afterall a computer can put up a very tough game of chess but from what I've seen of NL programs they struggle to compete in a ring game.

Maybe the advanced players are not sitting their solving vastly complex chess style problems but are just better at reading people.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

in the case of no-limit hold 'em:

1. there's a ton of "basic" stuff that isn't in print
2. the market is presumably small for such books
3. there aren't many people that are good enough to write one AND are sufficiently motivated to get the writing done AND can write reasonably well or find someone to do it for them.

however, i think easier-to-write versions will be out in the coming year or two - primarily hand example books.

also, motivation is interesting. there isn't enough money in books to outweigh a high-paying job or a skilled player's earn rate, assuming that person liked to play. interest or ego or something else has to motivate you.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

The comparison between poker and chess has been raised before, and shown to be pointless.

1. Chess is a game of perfect information, poker is not.

2. At any point in a chess game there is an optimal move. In poker there is not. In poker, the answer as to what to do next is always "it depends". That is never the answer in chess. Even after the fact, experts can disagree as to whether a poker hand was played correctly.

3. In chess, you are playing one opponent. In poker you are playing many, and the unknown future actions of one (which may or may not be "correct") affect the unknown future actions of others.

In short, the best a good advanced poker book can teach you is how and what to think about in a situation. It can't do your thinking for you.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

sorry jackcase,ive attained a pretty good level(only master but still,far enough that i know what im talking about) in chess and let me tell u this...

there s a lot more similarities between chess and poker then u think!!

ure quote:"In poker, the answer as to what to do next is always "it depends". That is never the answer in chess. "

totally false...

quote:" Even after the fact, experts can disagree as to whether a poker hand "

as in chess as well !!

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

i agree

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

harrington books are advanced

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Have you tried Harrington's workbook?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

To the OP,

You've never read How Good is Your Limit Hold'em, have you?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
harrington books are advanced

[/ QUOTE ]

advanced, but surely not truely advanced

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

phydaux - How Good is your Limit Holdem?
Really?

I like this book as much as the next guy but it is hardly advanced.

I agree with the OP but I think it's kind of hard to explain to others.

Better chess books are written with the understanding that the reader is already a pretty advanced player.

In poker books it's like they feel the need to yet again explain some really basic concepts for the reader and take more baby-steps to be careful not to lose anyone along the way.

Perhaps to some degree Stox's book takes a more advanced approach imo.

But still, Stox will do something in his hand-examples with something like (I'm just making something up here, but you get the idea) "defending in the BB with KQ vs. a steal-raise (meaning a raise from the CO, button or SB) is an autmoatic play."

First, anyone should know what a steal-raise means. If not, just throw it in the glossary or something.

Second, anyone should know that a blind-defense with KQ is an automatic play.

I love Stox's book and think that many of the concepts are awesome. I'm not sure that skipping some of the beginner-ish stuff is the right thing to do or not.
But there is no doubt that some of it does indeed contain beginnerish stuff.

In a more advanced chess book, when a move is pretty much automatic it just shows the move.
It doesn't feel the need to go into such detail as, "when the opponent puts you in check then you need to either move your king, block the check with one of your pieces, or capture the piece that is putting you in check. In this case, blocking the check with your knight is the obvious play."
It will simply show the move as Nf7 or something and if you can't figure out that this was a pretty obvious move then that's your problem.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

well i just really think the reason about:

"Better chess books are written with the understanding that the reader is already a pretty advanced player.

In poker books it's like they feel the need to yet again explain some really basic concepts for the reader and take more baby-steps to be careful not to lose anyone along the way."


i just simply think theres more "serious" chess players then they are poker player.

what i mean is,there is so much activities on the world scene with intermediate and up players in chess vs poker(and much more stuff to learn then in poker),that a market much larger in chess exist then in poker...

but anyway,i seriously think the need of the OP for such book is needed and probably in 2007,with the ever increasing # of poker players,such book would find a lot of reader(and buyer:)).

cause no matter what,with internet,player gets better much faster and the urge of "knowlegde" should go up likewise!

im just afraid like a previuos poster said,its all about someone (world class),takes the time and energy to write with all the work it needs to be created,wich i suspect is alot and certainly not that.....profitable:)...

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Yep microbob, that is the key

It's time that poker books stop by assuming the reader it a noob and skip basic stuff.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

OP,
Have you checked out Mathematics of Poker?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

We will see what Ray Zee's new book is like.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

how is Mathematics of Poker??? Just thought about buying it today

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

nm

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Assume you are a professional poker player and you make your living from a small set of secrets. Why share them with the public if that book doesn't make you enough money to live from it for the rest of your life?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
sorry jackcase,ive attained a pretty good level(only master but still,far enough that i know what im talking about) in chess and let me tell u this...

there s a lot more similarities between chess and poker then u think!!

ure quote:"In poker, the answer as to what to do next is always "it depends". That is never the answer in chess. "

totally false...



[/ QUOTE ]

How come the poker programs seem to struggle against (multiple) intermediate players yet can play very tough chess?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Assume you are a professional poker player and you make your living from a small set of secrets. Why share them with the public if that book doesn't make you enough money to live from it for the rest of your life?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's not just about secrets, it's about thinking under pressure. Financial pressure, time pressure, event pressure, venue pressure, physical conditions pressure.

The level of thinking involved in the some of the example hands in Barry's book is only moderately difficult if you're sitting at home with no pressure, but extremely difficult in real conditions.

Players who can learn a style or technique (such as many of the moves associated with the Gus Hansen style) and would actually pose a real threat to the livelihood a world-class players who successfully practice that style or technique probably don't need a book to learn it. And this set of players is far outnumbered by those who would tend to mis-apply the secrets. In certain respects it's a win-win.

I wonder if the problem is that those pushing the envelope in poker education prefer other mediums. PXF, CR ... etc. But videos of online games force your pace, either too slow or too fast. I've always had this experience with video learning. I much prefer written instruction.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
in the case of no-limit hold 'em:

1. there's a ton of "basic" stuff that isn't in print


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt - I hear people say this all the time. I'm hoping your book will address these issues, and I'm planning on purchasing it asap. Could you just give even a brief generic of one such concept? I'm always curious as to what people mean when they make a statement like this. Thanks, and looking forward to the book.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the case of no-limit hold 'em:

1. there's a ton of "basic" stuff that isn't in print


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt - I hear people say this all the time. I'm hoping your book will address these issues, and I'm planning on purchasing it asap. Could you just give even a brief generic of one such concept?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go to Ed Miller's web site. There is an excellent 7 part article that would make an excellent intro book to basic NL strategy. In fact, he has posted on the ITH forums that he might make a book out of it.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

ITH?

Great articly, BTW. I downloaded all seven of then and made a pdf.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

I think the Stox book is advanced.

While "poker is a game of imperfect information" is the common mantra, it's exaggerated. Chess for example, might theoretically be a game of perfect information, but in practice it's a silly point. It's a game of imperfeect information in practice because no one, not even a computer, can analyze the near-infinite decision trees. It has not been done in our lifetime, so it's a moot point. Some say it will be done someday, some say it cannot be done.

JackCase argues that "At any point in a chess game there is an optimal move". That's basically irrelevant since the optimal move is unknowable with current technology. Except for obvious cases like forced mate in a small number of moves. This easy situation would be roughly analogous to knowing that you should bet on the river with the nuts if all your opponents have checked to you.

Conversely, if you treat a game like limit with hand ranges and probabilities, then indeed it much resembles the game of "perfect information" like chess. Read the Stox book and I think you'll see what I mean. Of course this depends on you estimating the hand ranges and probabilities correctly (including the probabilities of bluffs). But when you have the estimates, it becomes a straight math formula. (There are certainly almost infinitely fewer lines in limit holdem than in chess.)

NL is a different animal and is sometimes less open to analysis. (In essence, limit poker provides a series of discrete decisions, while in NL it's basically infinite due to the choice of bet amount.) However Harrington has a section on SHAL (Structured Hand Analysis) in Vol 2.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

"How come the poker programs seem to struggle against (multiple) intermediate players yet can play very tough chess?"

first off,chess program developper strat as early as 1960....u think they started that soon for poker?

second,far less efforts have been made to make powerfull poker program then chess(how many company sell chess programs compare to poker??).

third,i just seriously hope that u dont think chess is easier then poker lol.....

4th,its only since the 90s that chess program started to beat expert or master rank in chess,before that it was a real joke for about 20 years work from the companys...

5th,yes u hear computer beating world chess champion but belive me....those arent "normal" computer where u can buy a program in the store,its a made super computer that cost million of $ and can see around over 100 millions of moves and calculation per seconds.
with a computer like that with 3 technician over it,im pretty sure they could beat any intermeditae player like u talk about,w/o the need of work it took for chess.

with all the analysis a computer can make on your play,it could be pretty powerfull if the time,energy ,money,etc that need, would to be put by corporations,maybe the need for it and the sell for it just isnt there to bring the interest for it...

anywya.thats beside the point,im telling u this:i see lot of psychologycal similirtites in poker as in chess.
if u dont belive me i really dont mind anyway:)

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Because there is no absolutely correct line of play. Bad beats are proof of this. If you know the odds and play right, both of which concepts are fuzzy, you'll have much better luck. Mathematics is very badly taught in North America, so most people don't have a clue, and cannot calculate odds. Professional poker players understand odds either by experience, calculation or intuition, because if they didn't they'd be dead broke. Explaining things clearly in a book is very difficult, that said, read every poker book in your chosen field and read it critically (is this true or false in my own experience? dunno is an acceptable answer), you will learn something new and useful, I always have. Even if it's "THERE I LEARNT HOW NOT TO DO IT!"

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

There are three inherent issues.

First, most authors just don't have enough knowledge to write such a book. Many of the players who do know these types of things won't write the book because it takes a lot of time and energy (more than one would think). Even if they wanted to write the book, many of these guys would have a hard time writing something that can be understood.

Second, the market for books with only advanced knowledge is extremely small. Why make a tremendous book if five people are going to buy it? Beside this, my opinion on the best books for learning has always been that they start with fundamentals that most readers can grasp and then move you into the really advanced stuff. The best books for doing this transition so smoothly that you don't even know you've ever learned really advanced stuff. For example, Feynman's Lectures on Physics are unbelievably good books that start off really basic, but if you know understand the stuff in there, you've got all the tools you'd need to be a great physicist. That's one hell of a book, IMO.

Finally, poker is a game of incomplete information and this impacts how you can discuss it because the number of possible outcomes goes up too fast to consider every option. It's been years since I've read about chess, but I recall a lot of situational analysis. This isn't always what top poker is about.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Sucker,

Can you give an objective overview of how your book will turn out in terms of beginner / intermediate / advanced? I'm not looking for hype and will buy the book regardless, but would appreciate a real objective point of view as to your target audience and the level of your book.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
There are three inherent issues.

First, most authors just don't have enough knowledge to write such a book. Many of the players who do know these types of things won't write the book because it takes a lot of time and energy (more than one would think). Even if they wanted to write the book, many of these guys would have a hard time writing something that can be understood.

Second, the market for books with only advanced knowledge is extremely small. Why make a tremendous book if five people are going to buy it? Beside this, my opinion on the best books for learning has always been that they start with fundamentals that most readers can grasp and then move you into the really advanced stuff. The best books for doing this transition so smoothly that you don't even know you've ever learned really advanced stuff. For example, Feynman's Lectures on Physics are unbelievably good books that start off really basic, but if you know understand the stuff in there, you've got all the tools you'd need to be a great physicist. That's one hell of a book, IMO.

Finally, poker is a game of incomplete information and this impacts how you can discuss it because the number of possible outcomes goes up too fast to consider every option. It's been years since I've read about chess, but I recall a lot of situational analysis. This isn't always what top poker is about.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your (2) and (3).

Re (2) : There is a poker boom going on. And there is no reason why the book's audience must consist only of those who will get very far with the book. Actually, it's the opposite. Just like all the PXF and CR subscribers who almost never login. Just like during the day trading boom the number of people who bought expensive services, went to expensive seminars, and bought expensive books and never got much out of them. The financial incentive to write a truly advanced poker books is definitely there. No question about that.

Re (3) : incomplete information is exactly what makes an truly advanced book so compelling. Great players don't always put players on a definite hand. They might have them on 2,3 or even more possible hands. How do they decide the relative probabilities of each hand, and how does that then figure into their rough calc of expected value of calling (or other play).

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in the case of no-limit hold 'em:

1. there's a ton of "basic" stuff that isn't in print


[/ QUOTE ]

Matt - I hear people say this all the time. I'm hoping your book will address these issues, and I'm planning on purchasing it asap. Could you just give even a brief generic of one such concept? I'm always curious as to what people mean when they make a statement like this. Thanks, and looking forward to the book.

[/ QUOTE ]


sure. in PNL we really had to start from the beginning. bet sizing, stack sizes, commitment, position, pot control. all are basic concepts that you can't build a good pro game without.

take commitment = willing to get all in. how many players actually ask, on every street, "Am I committed?" or better "Under what conditions will I commit here?" there is no more important question, but how many people ACTUALLY think about that at the start of every betting round? if you want to be a strong MSNL player you should hardwire that question into your game.

take pot control. the main concept has two parts. first if you're happily committed do what it takes to build a big pot. default is make a big bet, and you modify from there as the situation dictates. the other half is when you aren't committed but want to see a showdown, keep the pot small UNLESS you have reason to do otherwise. we detail some of those potential reasons, and discuss that checking and making smaller bets are the main strategy for keeping pots small. also, we define what a big pot is: that's key. i have seen a great many hands similar to "the pot is $30. we have $60 left on the flop. i check the flop for pot control." no you don't. not with a stack-to-pot ratio of 2. the pot is already too big for keeping the pot small.

these aren't new but we lay them out with examples as simply as we could.

getting more into it, we discuss range / equity / maximize (REM). that's how you should think. what range does my opponent potentially have? what does he think of my range? what's my equity against his range? how do I maximize against his range? raise? check? bet small? what line should i take? etc.

again, this is all basic, but it's not sufficiently covered in print imo. keep in mind i haven't read most of the nl books including much of Largay, How to Dominate, etc.

there are so many such topics it's astonishing that there aren't more books out. plenty of low-lying fruit to pick.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

Thanks, Matt. All that makes sense, and I don't think I've seen you're examples covered in text (at least not that way). Can't wait for the book. Thanks for opening up your knowledge and game to those of us who need it.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are three inherent issues.

First, most authors just don't have enough knowledge to write such a book. Many of the players who do know these types of things won't write the book because it takes a lot of time and energy (more than one would think). Even if they wanted to write the book, many of these guys would have a hard time writing something that can be understood.

Second, the market for books with only advanced knowledge is extremely small. Why make a tremendous book if five people are going to buy it? Beside this, my opinion on the best books for learning has always been that they start with fundamentals that most readers can grasp and then move you into the really advanced stuff. The best books for doing this transition so smoothly that you don't even know you've ever learned really advanced stuff. For example, Feynman's Lectures on Physics are unbelievably good books that start off really basic, but if you know understand the stuff in there, you've got all the tools you'd need to be a great physicist. That's one hell of a book, IMO.

Finally, poker is a game of incomplete information and this impacts how you can discuss it because the number of possible outcomes goes up too fast to consider every option. It's been years since I've read about chess, but I recall a lot of situational analysis. This isn't always what top poker is about.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your (2) and (3).

Re (2) : There is a poker boom going on. And there is no reason why the book's audience must consist only of those who will get very far with the book. Actually, it's the opposite. Just like all the PXF and CR subscribers who almost never login. Just like during the day trading boom the number of people who bought expensive services, went to expensive seminars, and bought expensive books and never got much out of them. The financial incentive to write a truly advanced poker books is definitely there. No question about that.

Re (3) : incomplete information is exactly what makes an truly advanced book so compelling. Great players don't always put players on a definite hand. They might have them on 2,3 or even more possible hands. How do they decide the relative probabilities of each hand, and how does that then figure into their rough calc of expected value of calling (or other play).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll leave the market/demand questions for Mason (and to a lesser extent David and Ray), but rest assured nobody will be able to say that the book Zee and I have writen will not have enough advanced material. I don't know of many players who won't learn a few things when they go through it - heck, when I read through it for editing recently, a few things were triggered with my own game. It's a book of how to think like a top player and how to implement a top-level thought process at your game, whether it's 5/10 or 500/1000 limit. As for your hand range argument, don't worry - we talk all about the myriad of situations that you will normally encounter. Also, you may see that we think about these things different than many do.

That said, my philosophy has always been that any book with advanced material should have enough general material so most can get into the meat of the material. Not many books do this (in any subject).

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sucker,

Can you give an objective overview of how your book will turn out in terms of beginner / intermediate / advanced? I'm not looking for hype and will buy the book regardless, but would appreciate a real objective point of view as to your target audience and the level of your book.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I did my job, my book will be approachable for a moderately-experienced poker player but will also teach high-limit veterans some truly outstanding things.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
ITH?

[/ QUOTE ]

Internet Texas Holdem forum (Matt Hilger, of ITH book fame)

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Because there is no absolutely correct line of play. Bad beats are proof of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely incorrect. Bad beats are not proof at all that you should not take a $1 bet with a $1 payoff if you have >50% chance of succeeding.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, poker is a game of incomplete information and this impacts how you can discuss it because the number of possible outcomes goes up too fast to consider every option. It's been years since I've read about chess, but I recall a lot of situational analysis. This isn't always what top poker is about.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's interesting you say that because "the number of possible outcomes goes up too fast to consider every option" is precisely the reason you can't prove much in chess either (and there are far fewer options in poker). The only reason chess masters can analyze things is that they've learned by experience that certain positions look fundamentally good or bad to them by eye. For example, "If white does this and black does this and white does this and black does this, I can't think ahead any more moves than that but the position looks pretty good for white at that point." They don't have any proof of anything at all (except, as I mentioned before, when they can prove forced checkmate in a short number of moves).

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
take commitment = willing to get all in. how many players actually ask, on every street, "Am I committed?" or better "Under what conditions will I commit here?" there is no more important question, but how many people ACTUALLY think about that at the start of every betting round? if you want to be a strong MSNL player you should hardwire that question into your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Angel Largay writes about a similar way of thinking. It's not as fleshed out as yours is in terms of analysis, but he says for every hand you're in, you should be asking who's more likely to go broke with this hand - me or my opponent? That question can guide you to play the hand.

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

I was looking at Largay's book and the reviews on it were excellent. What do real poker players think about it? I don't even buy books anymore due to the fact that every book just rehashes the same idea. My game has plateau'd, so I think I need to start doing something differently. Is this a good book to start back with since I am playing $1/2NL?

Re: Why can no one write a truly advanced poker book ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Players who can learn a style or technique (such as many of the moves associated with the Gus Hansen style) and would actually pose a real threat to the livelihood a world-class players who successfully practice that style or technique probably don't need a book to learn it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gus Hansen is not the best example for modern book knowledge because he is quite different from the average person. He was into speed math since his early childhood and his brain works like a human Pokerstove. Stuff like that is a natural gift and you can't learn it from books, at least not books on Poker.