How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold'em

[JJay1231]

Just ordered this book a few days ago, now I think ive just made a mistake [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

oh well, wouldn't be the first time.

[smbruin22]

i'm somewhat confused and haven't seen the example in full (although the poster said it didn't give details)..

what kind of game does the author like if he doesn't like loose-passive??

and, as per the example, i'd be very inclined to fold after being bet into with more 1 or 2 more callers around (example didn't give details). .... also, i'd be a little concerned that the paired A or K on turn wouldn't be good.

with all due respect, the fact that % improves on turn is very nit-ish..... the turn often changes everything anyway. then i'm extremely worried my pair A/K isn't good.

[jeffnc]

Once thing I want to say is that I'm *not* reviewing the book, because I've only read about 45 pages of it. I just want to point out the confusing/wrong things I'm seeing.

Frankly, I still don't understand what types of players he wants at his table and why. He seems to imply that variety itself is more profitable than a table full of the single most profitable style of opponent.

"The more variety at the table, the better. It gives us a chance to mix our play and play our players. The opponents that give up their money the easiest are the most welcome."

The last sentence seems to contradict the first. I really don't understand it.

[*TT*]

howtodominate - please release a book contained with old school gambling stories from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. That seems to be your forte and it was the part of your book i really liked.

I spent 10 minutes with your book, which I admit would not show an honest picture of your work however from what little i saw your strategy advice seems tailored to the typical low limit rounder in Vegas, the guy who thinks that advice from 2+2 forum strategy is too loose and reckless because "they all play on the internet", generally thats not a good fit for the audience here. Its not good for the typical low limit grinder in Vegas either IMHO, but its what they want to see and hear - even if its not optimal strategy. If I am wrong than understand thats how it comes across from 10 minutes of reading... which is not a good first impression.

[larrondo]

Hey TT.

I'm intrigued by some of your comments and I wish you'd elaborate on them a bit. I don't know much about the low limit Vegas grinder, but it seems like you're saying they are weak/tight and adverse to risk. Is that the style the book advocates? It's surprising, given the title.

[jeffnc]

It's hard to know *exactly* what the book proposes since the text is confusing or wrong. For example, in one place it states the odds of making a flush by the river when starting with 2 suited cards is something like 20% (it is *far* lower than that). This implies playing suited cards would be very valuable. In another place it says AKs is not much of an advantage over AKo. And in yet another place it ranks KQs as a better hand than AKo.

The book seems to be saying that you should be playing big cards for top pair value, and then pricing players out of their drawing-type hands with "power" betting and raising. If you can't find a table where this strategy works well, then go home and try again another time.

[Red Racer]

Well, while most of you have been posting with a partial read, I have read all the book and some of it twice.

While I could get picky about this and that in the book, enough of that has already been done.

The author’s goal is clear. It’s about dominating the small blinds games in no limit and nothing else. You start with baby steps and end with giant steps. Midway in the book it begins undoing many of those beginner’s rules and in the last 180 pages or so it advances to domination.

Limit play does not apply. Large no limit does not directly apply. Tournament play does not apply, although the book might help. If you’re a limper junkie, don’t buy it. Those are not what the book is about.

Sam concentrates on playing the people who are found in one kind of game – small no limit games - and he does it well. Read the book to the end for a ton of good poker discussion.

The book is well written and fun. I’ll keep going back to it.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
Sam concentrates on playing the people who are found in one kind of game – small no limit games - and he does it well. Read the book to the end for a ton of good poker discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly do intend to read the book to the end. However, based on the repeated (almost ad nauseaum) comments about avoiding loose passive tables, I have a real problem with your premise. The players found in small no limit games are very often loose and passive. Leaving the game just because you can only play one style just seems like a really bad idea to me.

[Pokerlogist]

I read most of the book and was suprised how much I liked it. I give it 7 of 10 stars. I've read just about every other poker book except Flynn's new book which I have on order. The strength in Sam's book is in the area of "playing the player" for which there is not much written elsewhere. It is a good complement to the quantitative-oriented NLHTP book (7 of 10 stars). There are many nuggets in Sam's book. The main caveat is that it is written from point of view of a live uncapped 10-ring 1/2 NL game where many here at 2+2 are playing multitable 6-max or HU NL online. Still many of the book's ideas can be adapted. If I have time I'll write a more detailed review.

[howtodominate]

Nice review, Pokerlogist. Thank you.

Sam