|
|
#11
10-25-2007, 03:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
Hi- please ensure you read at least one book dealing with math as well. i.e. Mathematics of Poker, or Killer Poker by the Numbers.
|
|
#12
10-25-2007, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Iv just had some bonus books shipped to me they arrived today. The first one i looked at was SSHE and within a few pages i realized it was geared towards limit hold-em. Problem is i never have and never will play limit so is it still worth reading? Are the ideas and theories within the book transferable or applicable to small stakes no-limit games? I dont want to waste hours reading it if its not as i have the Theory of poker, Poker essays and Harrington to get through. Thanks for any replies. [/ QUOTE ] What Small Stakes Hold'em will teach you is a good strategy for VERY loose games (an average of four or more people seeing the flop). A normal strategy for that kind of game might be to nut peddle your big hands and big draws, and get paid off big when you have six players see the flop, and three or four of them with you all the way to showdown. Instead, SSHE advocates a very aggresive strategy of playing even the smallest pairs (because you will give paid off big when you make a set), as well as discussion of playing other somewhat speculative hands such as Ax, K3s, or 56s. In other words, normally bad starting hands become playable if you are against weak, loose players and getting big odds. I was skeptical at first, but I realized that, at least at online microlimits, there are plenty of applications for this, where you will see these kinds of games, and that many loose players. As two examples, in PokerStars NLHE .01/.02, if you are patient you will find tables that are 70% see-the-flop. In microlimit MTT, it is likely that your first two tables will be very loose. In microlimit turbo MTTs, the big bets and shoves come fast and furious after as little as 30 minutes. If you have a decent stack, you can stick in two high cards, or almost any suited connectors, and stack two players in same hand if you hit. Sometimes even a micro SNG will be crazy until a couple people bust out, so I think the general idea is applicable in a broad range of micro situations. If you have sex people see the flop in the first two hands, even in a SNG, be ready to get those small pairs in at every opportunity. Two caveats: 1. Be aware that the sprecific math in the book won't apply to limit at all. It's only the idea of aggressives in very loose games that you're trying to absorb. 2. You HAVE to be able to get away from a hand if you get a bad flop. When I talk about stacking someone in a turbo, I don't mean to bet half your stack preflop with 6h6d. But if three other players see a flop of AJ6, then you're in business! Agressive play in very loose games isn't the answer to everything, but it's an important weapon to have in your ansenal if you're playing low limits. [/ QUOTE ] About an hour after submitting the above post, I am first in line for a PokerStars micro cash game with a see-the-flop percentage of 88%. Yes, EIGHTY-EIGHT PERCENT of the players in a nine-player ring are, on average, seeing-the-flop!
|
|
#13
10-25-2007, 04:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
[ QUOTE ]
i never have and never will play limit [/ QUOTE ] This always makes me lol. People act like LHE is so inferior to NL. I started out in LHE moved to NL and am now back in LHE to improve my fundamentals. My advice to any beginning player (which I still am) would be to become a solid LHE player before transitioning to NL. SSHE is the best book out there for that.
|
|
#14
10-25-2007, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
I actually just finished it, put it down, and signed on to 2+2 like 5 minutes ago. I loved it, thought it had some really great ideas and concepts and gave me a better understanding in some ways of what poker really is about and why better p layers make money in the long run, but I've been playing a lot of limit lately so that is why I got it. As far as it being a good book for a solely NL player I think there are definatly better reads out there, but then again it has alot of great material and if you ever decide to try your hand at limit I urge you to read through it first.
|
|
#15
10-29-2007, 02:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
[ QUOTE ]
If you're never, ever going to play limit, then don't read it. There are just too many other books that you should be reading and re-reading instead. But if you're considering playing limit, it's a must read. [/ QUOTE ] if one were to follow this advice you might as well stick your head in the sand... poker is poker and there is a myriad of crossovers strategically as well as pscychologically. understadning one form of poker can certainly be drawn upon in other situations in other forms of poker. SSHE is a rocking book stressing the fundamentals and aggressiveness we all strive for. there are many examples of people taking a philosophy from one arena andapplying it to another successfully. you can tell someone, "if you aren't ever gonna write fortune cookies don't read 'ichong sayings' or the 'art of war'. read books about business success." thousands of people have read ichong and art of war and aplied them to the marketplace and their own businesses... highly successfuly i might add. diversity is the key and knowing when to draw upon these arts is something that will give you a sharp advantage over your opponent. i own books on omaha8 and stud. i've read them multiple times but i don't play either game. maybe one day, but right now i don't. there are keys in their strategies which pop up every now and then in other games. i own probably $500-$600+ or more in poker related books. there are even good lessons in annie dukes 'how i won flirted my way...' autobiography. it's not a NL or LHE book but it is filled with little bits of wisdom you can add to your game. every one should read and devour any book having to do with poker. period. being diverse in your poker knowledge, giving you a broader base and foundation can only enhance your game. add Small Stakes Hold'em to your bookshelf. you won't be sorry you did. EN
|
|
#16
10-29-2007, 03:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If you're never, ever going to play limit, then don't read it. There are just too many other books that you should be reading and re-reading instead. But if you're considering playing limit, it's a must read. [/ QUOTE ] if one were to follow this advice you might as well stick your head in the sand... poker is poker and there is a myriad of crossovers strategically as well as pscychologically. understadning one form of poker can certainly be drawn upon in other situations in other forms of poker. SSHE is a rocking book stressing the fundamentals and aggressiveness we all strive for. there are many examples of people taking a philosophy from one arena andapplying it to another successfully. you can tell someone, "if you aren't ever gonna write fortune cookies don't read 'ichong sayings' or the 'art of war'. read books about business success." thousands of people have read ichong and art of war and aplied them to the marketplace and their own businesses... highly successfuly i might add. diversity is the key and knowing when to draw upon these arts is something that will give you a sharp advantage over your opponent. i own books on omaha8 and stud. i've read them multiple times but i don't play either game. maybe one day, but right now i don't. there are keys in their strategies which pop up every now and then in other games. i own probably $500-$600+ or more in poker related books. there are even good lessons in annie dukes 'how i won flirted my way...' autobiography. it's not a NL or LHE book but it is filled with little bits of wisdom you can add to your game. every one should read and devour any book having to do with poker. period. being diverse in your poker knowledge, giving you a broader base and foundation can only enhance your game. add Small Stakes Hold'em to your bookshelf. you won't be sorry you did. EN [/ QUOTE ] EN, your point is well taken. My advice was a bit broad. Had it been more nuanced, I would have said that it's an excellent book that will enhance one's understanding of poker and should be read at some point. But if I were a no limit player, I would move it well to the bottom of my reading list. There are two reasons for this. First, any time spent studying SSHE is time that can't be spent on PNL or on Harrington, for example. And these books merit multiple reads and study. If someone is in the just starting out stage, this is a much more productive use of their time. Second, it is much more likely that a newer player would get more out of SSHE after having been playing for quite a while. Once they have a good grasp of all of the NL concepts, it would be much more apparent which advice in SSHE applies generally to poker and which is specific to limit and which is specific to small stakes limit in particular. Reading it anytime soon would be asking to either not get very much out of it, or, worse--become confused. But perhaps I was a little too simplistic. I'd just urge anyone who is still wondering what good books there are for NLHE to wait quite a while before reading about other games.
|
|
#17
10-29-2007, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
And I would strongly disagree - I'd encourage any beginner to learn at least two or three of the HORSE games and to try a wild card like PLO or TDL. You will get the big picture of poker quicker, and if you have a strong aptitude/love for a different game that you may not have considered playing because you were deadset on being a no limit holdem player...you'll find out.
Also, learning different games presents a different set of poker challenges - each game requires a different nuance to excel, and you should really have those nuances. Personally I know I'm a better NLHE player because of the time I spent learning Omaha.
|
|
#18
10-29-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
[ QUOTE ]
And I would strongly disagree - I'd encourage any beginner to learn at least two or three of the HORSE games and to try a wild card like PLO or TDL. You will get the big picture of poker quicker, and if you have a strong aptitude/love for a different game that you may not have considered playing because you were deadset on being a no limit holdem player...you'll find out. Also, learning different games presents a different set of poker challenges - each game requires a different nuance to excel, and you should really have those nuances. Personally I know I'm a better NLHE player because of the time I spent learning Omaha. [/ QUOTE ] agreed. for some reason running through life with blinders on isn't appealing to me. i carry 2-3 different poker books with me to work and will leaf through different sections at different times. there are also a couple poker mags in my bag as well to round things out. dabbling in nl a year or two ago i wasn't as solid - not that i'm solid now - as i am after 100k+ hands of LHE. O8 still gives me fits though... SSHE is an excellent read and SHOULD BE at or near the top of the list of ANY poker game specialists library. EN
|
|
#19
10-29-2007, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whos read Small stakes Hold-em?
I used to hate on limit poker all the time, thought it was boring and I didn't understand it until I was forced to play it becuase a cruise I was on only had limit tables in their casino, ever since then I've been hooked and started to try different games becuase of that experience, my point is that you gotta try different games becuase one I swore off is now my favorite form of hold em.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
