Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

I don't see where Brunson talks about stealing blinds. Stealing blinds is common late in no limit tournaments, when the play is very tight and there are blinds and antes.

Brunson talks about stealing small pots, not stealing blinds.

I don't think either Brunson or Sklansky and Miller emphasize stealing blinds. There books are primarily about cash game play, where blind stealing is not important.

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

Maybe the fundamental misunderstanding is that the Snyders don't realize NLH:T&P isn't about tournament NL hold'em? After all, Snyder's major book was about tournaments, not cash games.

Or perhaps they don't understand the not-so-subtle differences between tournament and non-tournament play?

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe the fundamental misunderstanding is that the Snyders don't realize NLH:T&P isn't about tournament NL hold'em? After all, Snyder's major book was about tournaments, not cash games.

Or perhaps they don't understand the not-so-subtle differences between tournament and non-tournament play?

[/ QUOTE ]


nope


[ QUOTE ]
As for the mistakes in Sklansky's and Miller's logic here, in a cash game where you can replenish your stack, it is bad logic to compare the size of the blinds with the maximum possible size of a pot in deciding whether and how to play a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

Mason - I think the title you chose for this thread is not very good. extremely misleading.

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

[ QUOTE ]
Mason - I think the title you chose for this thread is not very good. extremely misleading.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Bob:

Well, you're not the first to point this out to me and your comment is probably accurate. But it did catch your attention, and I did have a little fun.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

Since I got serious about playing no limit, I have read Sklansky's NL book about 10 times. In that same time I have read Largay's NL book once (awful book), and I have read Doyle's Super System I and II once each.

It is not difficult to figure out where the good advice in NL comes from. I wouldn't worry about Snyder's opinion much. Snyder wrote some good blackjack books decades ago, but his recent incorrect tournament poker advice and now this only seems like jealousy towards better writers and players.

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

What I find remarkable is that in contrast to Limit HE, the styles in NL cash games amongst successful pros vary a lot. Therefore I think it is correct to say that more than one way leads to Rome. There are whole poker universes between David Grey and Prahlad Friedman, "Greenplastic" and all the others and yet they are all winning players. Isn't that weird?

Because of that it is almost ridiculous to watch Snyder and Mason trying to prove that the other is dead wrong on the subject. In my opinion the discussion is more about authorities than content and that's pretty sad.

The secret of NL Hold'em is to make the other guy fold...

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

LMAO Mason.

You clearly tilted Snyder with your criticism of his Poker Tournament Formula book.

He keeps rebuying, losing his buy in, and rebuying some more . . .

Re: Big Problems with Ed Miller
 

A lil back alley mugging by Snyder.
The poker world should be a freezeout and not a rebuy tourney...

Re: confused with the reason for the post ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dave doesn't put poker advice into print unless he knows he's right. And I don't mean he thinks he's right, or his advice is mostly right, I mean out to five decimal places, bet your daughter's virginity he's right right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that DS is infallible? That in his dozens of books there are no mistakes, miscalculations, or bad advice?