Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

So I was just finishing reading Phil Gordon's Little Blue Book. At the end of the book he has section called A Short Guide To Poker Jargon. There he describes something he calles FPS or fance play syndrome. He says:
[ QUOTE ]
An expensive tendency, espicially evident in players who have just read Sklansky and Malmuth, to overuse "trick" plays like checkraising or semibluffing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is he taking a shot at DS and MM? Seems like he isn't giving them much credit for what they have done.

Also it seems to me that 2+2'ers generally don't like Phil Gordon... Has it anything to do with this?

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

I don't think so, it's very easy to fall into that trap after reading HPFAP if the ideas are new to you.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

[ QUOTE ]
So I was just finishing reading Phil Gordon's Little Blue Book. At the end of the book he has section called A Short Guide To Poker Jargon. There he describes something he calles FPS or fance play syndrome. He says:
[ QUOTE ]
An expensive tendency, espicially evident in players who have just read Sklansky and Malmuth, to overuse "trick" plays like checkraising or semibluffing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is he taking a shot at DS and MM? Seems like he isn't giving them much credit for what they have done.

Also it seems to me that 2+2'ers generally don't like Phil Gordon... Has it anything to do with this?

[/ QUOTE ]

He's probably referencing Hold Em Poker for Advanced Players. Players with a beginner/intermediate understanding of poker like Gordon often don't understand or misapply the concepts suggested in the book.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

I don't think Gordon is taking a shot at them. All I think he is saying is that inexperienced players often misapply advanced concepts. If anything I think he's using Malmuth and Sklansky as examples of author's that write about advanced concepts.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

[ QUOTE ]
Players with a beginner/intermediate understanding of poker like Gordon often don't understand or misapply the concepts suggested in the book.

[/ QUOTE ]

His LGB really wasn't all that bad for a starter book, but I suspect he'd just drown trying anything advanced. Sklansky's stuff might not be perfect but it was certainly groundbreaking on arrival.

Frankly, with Gordon's vast bankroll, I wonder how well he really does overall. What little of his playing I've seen hasn't been that impressive - and his hands shake like crazy when he's playing. Who knows.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

I don't think that's a shot at all. He's simply saying some players get excited after reading some 2+2 books and over-use some of the concepts they've learned. How is that taking a shot? In fact, in LGB he credits Sklansky IIRC.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

I remember the Fancy Play Syndrome from the SS2 section on LHE by Jennifer Harman. Dunno whom she got it from.

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

I'm thinking Gary Carson

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that's a shot at all. He's simply saying some players get excited after reading some 2+2 books and over-use some of the concepts they've learned. How is that taking a shot? In fact, in LGB he credits Sklansky IIRC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Phil Gordon on Malmuth and Sklansky
 

[ QUOTE ]
I remember the Fancy Play Syndrome from the SS2 section on LHE by Jennifer Harman. Dunno whom she got it from.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike Caro used the term at least 10 years ago. Don't know if he coined it, but a lot of people attribute it to him.