Why Great Players Often Like My Stuff More Than Good Players

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Plus SOR happens to be probably the single best 2+2 book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually there's no book that 2+2 has ever published called, Sklansky on Razz, that I'm aware of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hello Adios,

Sklansky on Razz originally was published by a different company, however when Two Plus Two published Sklansky on Poker, they included Sklansky on Razz in the book.




Original book



[/ QUOTE ]


Yep, thanks for verifying I was right.

[David Sklansky]

In any case my original post was not about the fact that some great players are big fans but rather about the fact that some merely good players aren't. They like Harrington and Miller better because their writings tend to give concrete advice about what to do in the generic case that often applies well, whereas I tend to show you how to figure it out yourself once you make the read.

[Peter McDermott]

[ QUOTE ]

Others I am virtually certain based on common sense likely haven't read any 2+2 books at all. Chau, Doyle, Chip.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is the Doyle you refer to here Doyle Brunson? The same guy who solicited a chapter from David 'Einstein' Sklansky on High/Low for his own book on poker, Super System?

I suggest you re-read that chapter and see what Doyle has to say about his collaborator.

[numbnuts007]

This thread should have been titled "Why people who can tolerate arrogance like my stuff more than people who can't"

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Others I am virtually certain based on common sense likely haven't read any 2+2 books at all. Chau, Doyle, Chip.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is the Doyle you refer to here Doyle Brunson? The same guy who solicited a chapter from David 'Einstein' Sklansky on High/Low for his own book on poker, Super System?

I suggest you re-read that chapter and see what Doyle has to say about his collaborator.

[/ QUOTE ]

vnh

[barryg1]

1. I read all the poker books I could find when I was in high school and college. I don't remember them helping. If 2+2 books existed at that time in my career, I'm sure they would have helped me.

2. Most of the top players haven't read much beyond my book and possibly a little of super/system, mainly because they know Doyle and me personally.

3. Phil Ivey told me someone recommended Theory of Poker to him, so he read it. He also read my book. He has not read any other poker books.

4. Many of the successful players say that they are doing fine without poker books, so they don't want to be messed up by reading. That is the reason The Grinder gave me when he said he hadn't read my book. I think they are wrong, especially the younger players. At the least, it should help to know what other people are reading.

5. Most books are helpful if they are read at the right time in ones development. It isn't the right time for me at this point, but I try to read through the most popular titles anyway. I am they type of person who used to read math and computer science books leisurely, so poker books are not hard for me to get though, except for the boredom factor. Most of the players who don't read poker books, don't read other kinds of books either.

Barry

[The Dingo]

I have been a professional investment bank and hedge fund trader for 17 years. When I started as a trader I read literally everything I could find in Australia and then started buying all the books from a press in USA.

It was only after I became a proficient trader at CSFB and actually met some of the authors of these books did I realize that many of them did not TRADE.

Poker seems to be the opposite where one can get REAL VALUE reading Super System, Ace on the River and the MTT stuff of Harrington & Co. I particularly learned a lot from the latter 2 books about how OTHER people think when playing and coming from a NLH cash background to tournies learned the hard lessons quickly.

Also radio shows like the Circuit and Pokerwire give away for FREE some great advice for those who really listen and know how to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Like trading poker is an ART not a science (I would argue) but any world class advice one can buy for say $20-$100 in book format is precious.

We may not all become Barry Greenstein or even want to be that good but we can use his insight to improve and have more fun. Isnt that what it is all about

[*TT*]

Barry Greenstein:

Slightly off topic question. Is there a game that is played today (Badugi, Chinese Poker, pick your semi-obscure game of choice) that you would go our of your way to read about if a solid theoretical book was written about it? Did you look at Bill Chen's Mathmatics of Poker? If you were to read a book on a poker topic at this stage, what are you most interested in reading about?

I didn't think about this until your response, just curious.

[Mike Gallo]

Actually there's no book that 2+2 has ever published called, Sklansky on Razz, that I'm aware of.

Yep, thanks for verifying I was right.

Of course you were correct, your member number 10, [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] You should get a perfect score on Two Plus Two trivia.

When Two Plus Two published Sklansky on Poker, they included Sklansky on Razz in the book.

Anyone who does not have this book should get it and make it a part of his or her library. The book also has a tournament strategy section.

[raistlinx]

[ QUOTE ]
In any case my original post was not about the fact that some great players are big fans but rather about the fact that some merely good players aren't. They like Harrington and Miller better because their writings tend to give concrete advice about what to do in the generic case that often applies well, whereas I tend to show you how to figure it out yourself once you make the read.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not surprising as most people would rather be given instructions than figure things out themselves.

That is in no way a criticism of the Harrington and Miller books (I think they are fine books), just a statement on the nature of our North American society.