Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

Thanks everyone for the great replies thus far.

As I mentioned, I already own the Stox book, have read it once, and will be reading it again. I was already leaning towards buying the Borer/Mak book, and I think I will for sure now.

If I understand the posts here correctly, it sounds like neither book is geared more towards the lower limits than the other is...it would seem more that they differ somewhat in their approaches and how they are presented, and one would benefit from reading both regardless of limits played.

Is the Tanenbaum Advanced book geared towards FR, SH, or both?

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

Hi. FR only.


-barryt

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

[ QUOTE ]


I can understand that some people may prefer the style of the D&B book to the Stox book, but that's quite different to saying it's a better book.

IMO it's the other way around. If you are new to six max online then I'd suggest getting the borer book first. It's a good book. I'm sure it will help to turn losers into winning players at the low to mid limits. But when you feel the need to learn the game properly, read Stox.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

[ QUOTE ]
As for small stakes, just get SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bad advice in general, and it points out the basic problem with this book and its readers.

You do not want SSHE for small stakes games, you want SSHE for loose games against bad players.

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for small stakes, just get SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bad advice in general, and it points out the basic problem with this book and its readers.

You do not want SSHE for small stakes games, you want SSHE for loose games against bad players.

[/ QUOTE ]

well i'd say especially for loose/passive ones...

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for small stakes, just get SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bad advice in general, and it points out the basic problem with this book and its readers.

You do not want SSHE for small stakes games, you want SSHE for loose games against bad players.

[/ QUOTE ]

B&M

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

I wanted to thank Terry for responding to my comments and to reiterate that I think he (et al) wrote a solid book. I prefer Stox's book currently for the stakes and games I play at but I would have killed for this book a few years ago. I also found some valuable nuggets in here that has made me a better player overall. It is definitely worth a read by anyone serious about short-handed play.

YT

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

This could go in another thread, but since we're discussing SH materials, where does everyone feel the Dave Fromm DVDs fit in? Are they still of any value now that these two books are out there?

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

Fromm's DVD's are great but they do contradict some of Stox's/ Borers advice. Things like just cold calling raises in the small blind with hands that play well multiway instead of 3 betting when facing steal raises, defending open raises from the small blind with every single hand (read: 72o, 62o, 83o, T4o etc) when seated in the big blind, defending the big blind with any two suited etc. I'm not saying either one is wrong or right (of course I have my opinions) but just that some of the advice is different.

Re: Tanenbaum or Stox?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for small stakes, just get SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bad advice in general, and it points out the basic problem with this book and its readers.

You do not want SSHE for small stakes games, you want SSHE for loose games against bad players.

[/ QUOTE ]

B&M

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, pretty much always as it turns out. The point I was making though is that we should stop talking about attributes that aren't important. (Granted, the book does this too. The title has "Small Stakes" in it, when actually that has nothing to do with it.) Technically B&M has nothing to do with it either, although conditions are almost always right there for low limits.

The attibutes you're looking for are loose opponents who go too far with their hands. Online/BM doesn't matter, high/low limits doesn't matter.