Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Hi all

I'm a long time player and started playing online a little while ago. So to get the feeling for online Poker I thought I'd start with small stake tables until I know my way out and then play my usual game at 10/20.

After a short while I realized that small stakes table are just horrible to play and that I need to adapt my game to the new situation. I went and buy the book of Sklansky about how to play small stakes... after reading the book carefully and trying to follow most of his strategies I must say that I'd better have lost my money at a table than for the book. My new experiences would have been more valuable.

What Sklansky suggests is actually to play loose against loose players! I've been playing for many years now and my tracks show that I'm pretty tight, solid and aggresive but since this strategy doesn't seem to work very well at small stakes online tables, I thought being open minded and reading about new ways would pay out. I know now that playing my usual way doesn't pay out as much as I'm used to, but I also know that the way they explain you to play doesn't pay out at all but makes you even loosing...

What are your experiences or opinions re this book?

Cheers Don

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

WOW! Are you sure you've been reading SSHE? Sklansky and Miller advocate a tight but aggressive policy throughout the book, not a loose one.

I'm pretty new to limit HE but have found the book to be a revelation - giving me some new ways of thinking about how to play on every street, and ways to push every edge in terms of playing weaker players, pot odds/implied odds and pot equity.

Reread it, and you might find that now you've been playing on these small stakes tables for a while against bad, loose players you'll be playing a lot tighter, and better than them.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

it's a good book for beginners. it's also still accurate for live play.

honestly, i think Stoxtrader's semi-new book(despite being directed at High Stakes play) is more pertinent to the online environment.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I think SSHE advocates loosening your starting hand requirements in loose and passive games. The reason for that being that in those games you'll often get to see cheap multiway flops, you'll get great overlay on your draws because everybody is calling, and you often get to draw cheaply since people arent betting and raising enough.

K5s is the quintessential loose/passive game hand for me. Once you get 2-3 limpers ahead of you it's fine to overlimp with that hand.

This is much more common in live games than online. Online today plays much more loose/aggressive (bordering on maniacal) than loose/passive. Especially 6max.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I don't play limit online any more (SNGs are just so much more fun). That said, SSHE is a completely accurate guidebook for crushing most live games I have seen up to and including 10/20.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

What a great, concise method for SSHE you've expressed here, Wolf! I myself have a certain fondness for Q8s, but I sure do love those suited Kings as well =]

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

SSHE is perfect for live games up to 10/20 at least. Just see if the table is playing passive or aggressive and loosen or tighten your starting hands accordingly.

I would choose HPFAP or the Stox book for live 15/30 or higher, shorthanded and all online games.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would choose HPFAP or the Stox book for live 15/30 or higher, shorthanded and all online games.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the name of the Stox book and where do you get it?

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would choose HPFAP or the Stox book for live 15/30 or higher, shorthanded and all online games.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the name of the Stox book and where do you get it?

[/ QUOTE ]

"Winning in Tough Hold Em Games"

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

-You don't know as much about poker as you think you do
-It is possible that SSH introduced you to some new leaks but you are still probably better off for having read the book
-Loose play is more correct in bigger pots. Fish make the pots bigger.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Guys keep in mind it is not that binary. Remember what DS said in Th.of Poker: Against loose players make your MADE HAND requirements looser, but tighten up on your bluffs. The other way around for tight games.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Thanks for all the interesting feedback and opinions.

As I mentioned before I play usually pretty tight/aggressive and at live tables. So coming at online tables where a guy raises you PF with as ex. 52s is very unusual for me... If I look now at the book DS explains that a low suited pocket card is very well playable on middle to late position.

He might be right, but one thing isn't said at this place; you get a very tough decision after the flop with cards like that. Per se, you've got pocket 9h/6h and the flop hits 9s/7d/3h... you've got top pair with no flush draw and just a small chance for straight.. and 2 outs for a set or quad...

Everybody would eventually raise at this point since slow playing may be very dangerous (overcards to come on turn or river)...

What I wanna say it that the decision to take is much tougher than if you would have played QTs. With low cards (suited) you might get commited to a pot that isn't worth playing... especially not when there are 3-6 other players involved...

From my point of view, Poker is mostly avoiding tough decisions that can cost a lot, so I'm still not sure that DS is right to recommend playing hands like that.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Don, I think you really need to re-read the book. Based on your post I think it's pretty clear that you're misunderstanding, or skimmed through a lot of really important concepts.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I would love to believe that you're right. But no I read the book carefully and even (beneath other things) wrote his points in a seperate Excel sheet...

What from your point of view have I missed?

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I think you hit the point here. It is a book for beginners and def not for online poker. I thought it would address strategies for a wider range of skilled players but it doesn't.

I'll though have a look at the book you were mentioning. Thanks for the hint

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

While SSHE is becoming less of the "Bible" for low limit holdem that it used to be for online games, it is still very relevant. The only reason for this is that online games have become much tougher and more aggressive.

Your comment on the 96h hand seems slightly concerning. Of course your hand is extremely vulnerable here, and if you don't feel comfortable in these situations then by all means fold. This is one of the reasons I hate starting hand charts ... while they are a good starting point, it's very player/skill dependent. Certainly, if you don't want to be in those spots then you should fold preflop.

If you didn't find SSHE to your liking for online games, give HPFAP a shot. I haven't read Stoxtrader's book yet but have heard good things. Personally, I still find myself poking through SSHE every now and then (usually when I'm running bad) and finding something that I needed to reiterate to myself, or some little gem about things I had stopped doing or should be doing more.

I do play mostly live games though these days, but to say that SSHE is only a book for beginner's and "def not for online poker" is just wrong. Read all the books though and I'm sure they'll all help you to some extent.

Good luck.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Hi Lethe

I'm playing now since over 7 years at live tables and I'm making a good living at it. I read till now tens (or should I say tons) of books. It goes without saying that without all these books I wouldn't have become as good as I modestly think I am (with all my weaknesses of course). You're also right when you say that they all help to a certain extend... But that's not the point here...

Where you mark the point - and we share the same opinion - is when you say that you hate starting hand charts... so do I! But like every novice we started one day looking at those charts and tried them out at the table until we found our own and rewarding way to play. But that's exactly where I've got problems with; of course I can fold this hand PF (what I also do) but since I'm trying to adapt my way to completely new game styles like online low stakes, I need to start somewhere. Where else should I start if not with charts or explainations like that?

Now I might be skilled or experienced enough to realize that this way of playing may not be rewarding (at least for me), but a total novice wont be capable of recognizing that. And that's where I find the SSHE chart / book very dangerous, because it might mislead them...

Books from Harrington as example teaches you in a much "saver" way how to play poker (even if mainly focussed on tournaments though).

Anyway I wont stretch the discussion indefinitely because I think that it's always and also a question of taste and playing style. The one method might suit the one and not the other... that's poker!

Hoping that SSHE helps you more than it harms you, I wish you good luck and good games

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

Don, seems to me that you are reading SSHE and reading the replies you are getting in this thread but not really understanding them fully, either that or you are not prepared to accept the advice yet because it isnt comfortable and contradicts with what you think and your experiences to date.

If you cant beat the low limits online playing something like what SSHE says then you arent playing right. I should know, I missapplied SSHE for ages before 'getting it'.

Poker is situational. Good players can read a book like SSHE or HEFAP and work out when to deviate from the advice in such books. If you cant do that then you arent as good as you think you are. The same players probably wore the covers of said books. Dont throw the baby out with teh bath water just because you dont like the advice for, say, low suited connectors. The postflop stuff in that book is really good altough if misaplied can lead you down the merry path to spewmonkeyville.

You probably SHOULDNT play a hand such as a low suited connector every time just because a chart says so....the charts make certain assumptions about the game types that often dont apply. Im not even going to try and expand on this further in this post.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway I wont stretch the discussion indefinitely because I think that it's always and also a question of taste and playing style. The one method might suit the one and not the other... that's poker!

[/ QUOTE ]

SSHE is a staple for low limits against online poker. No offence intended but just cos you cant win after reading it doesnt make it not applicable.

Don, do you think live poker is tougher than online poker?What limits are you currently playing online? If you cant beat them what makes you think youll beat 10/20 online? online limits dont really compare to the same live limits

anyway, goodluck with whatever you do

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
He might be right, but one thing isn't said at this place; you get a very tough decision after the flop with cards like that. Per se, you've got pocket 9h/6h and the flop hits 9s/7d/3h... you've got top pair with no flush draw and just a small chance for straight.. and 2 outs for a set or quad...

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that SSHE advises that you fold in situations like this.

IMO, it has really helped my game, especially live. SSHE is <u>not</u> for new players. They assume you already know how to play... the tactics help you improve your expected value in a variety of situations.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

- AussieBattler: I do read the postings very well, the point is that I don't see much of an advice in them... Although I read much more opinions and that is what I asked for initially... I'm not wanting to make a discussion about which strategy is best, enough postings in this forum cover this subject and it never comes to an end since (as I said before) everyone plays as it suits him...

But one thing I noticed, I said that I'm coming from a long term experience at live tables and that I try to find my way through online tables... almost everything what has been posted shows me that the people out there use this book as a guideline for live tables... That was never my point, I know how to play live...

MandM: You're generally right when you say it's not for new players. By saying novice or beginner I meant someone that knows how to play but just looks out to improve his play by learning how to play strategicaly.. But even then, why does DS explain the "principles" of odds if it's meant for someone with some kind of experience?

Anyway, I just find that DS wrote much better books than this one. Which by the way helped me improving my game since I started. Some of his books are still helping me till today and I love to open them again and I even think that I still learn re-reading them...

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, it has really helped my game, especially live. SSHE is not for new players. They assume you already know how to play... the tactics help you improve your expected value in a variety of situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would also add that this book is not only not for beginners, but is an advanced book -- more advanced than "Hold 'Em Poker for Advanced Players." SSHE introduces advanced concepts about a very specific type of game, whereas HEPAP covers a variety of advanced topics. It is also a dangerous book if incorrectly applied. The concepts in it are very difficult, and cannot be applied selectively (without a very good understanding of what you are doing).

I made the mistake of reading SSHE first, thinking it was less "advanced." I did not understand much of what I read to the degree I needed to in order to bet money on my skills. I recognized my mistake (and holes in my game), and after gaining more experience and reading other books (such as HEPAP), I am now re-reading SSHE. I find the concepts resonate much better with me, especially in the context of the knowledge I gained between readings.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

SSHE is not more advanced then HEPAP.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I am re-re-reading SSHE right now and I know where you are coming for Don. But if you go through the situations in the book they are technically sound. The times you hit your "loose" calls make up for the times you miss and fold. The book is talking about maximizing your profits, not winning every hand you are in.

That said, I am still trying to but the book fully in use so I cannot say from experience it works, but they work out in my head fine.

Online poker is different then live and SSHE is different from the way you played. There will be a breaking in period for both and you combined them.


You also might try "Your Worst Poker Enemy" by Schoonmaker.

Good luck.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I play small stakes myself now and play that book only,I couldn't beat the smaller games. This book is worth many thousand s of dollars just as it says and also I know you haven't read it very well because it is written for multitabling online not live. read page 2 and the intropage 6.... they are teaching maximum profits, You are just afraid to do what poker is meant for gamble; It also says directly that you are not to copy the chart! and you need only change things you have a thought out reason for, to me you are just to proud to get above 10/20 I had to come a long way down to set in a smallstakes game I could already beat most no limit games and any other game if I had the same players and enough of a bank behind me; no you should not just read it over but read it about 700X in a row, do only what it says ( or write out the more correct play in equal langauge) I have read mine into the dust No if you want to be a really good player that is a must book because it is how to beat bad players which none of the other books shows; I play by that book and I do not lose at all at the table I set at there are only two winners everyone else loses all ther money one is me one is the rake all the other stacks are thrown away. and as for the odds you must not know them because you are using them and winning or not; playing 35s on the button makes a profit; there is many ways to explain it but odds is one of them. If they are so different then what is stated you are not truly seeing what those players are like; So with out knowing what you could possibly mean I only have this to say you are down right wrong and showing by your speech expressed in your writting that you are not what you say and your life is not that good.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

I just want to add my two cents on SSHE, mostly by sharing my own experience with it.

It seems that, for me, when I read a poker book, I don't fully understand all of the concepts in there, misapply them when playing, and then, with some experience under my belt, I reread the book, and say, "OK, now I understand what they're saying." That's kind of the experience I had with SSHE.

SSHE is a great book, and it has made my game very profitable, since right now I can only afford to play at the lower limits with these types of players (3/6 limit). But you can't just read the book and expect to sit down at one of these loose/passive tables and dominate. You need a fair amount of experience with these types of players, understand how they think (or as often is the case, how they *don't* think), learn about their tendencies and habits. For me, a combination of applying the ideas in this book and real-life playing experience has really tightened my game up.

A few more points about some of the other topics you mentioned. You said that you're a tight and aggressive player. That's great, and that shouldn't change when you go to a loose table. With starting hand selection, all that changes at a loose table is that you can loosen up your own calling and raising requirements a *little* (emphasis on little), since a) even once you've loosened up a little bit, your starting hands are still probably better than the majority of hands that your opponents are playing, and b) with many hands, you're getting the pot odds to stay in the hand anyway. But you should *always* be aggressive. Loose tables make tons of bad calls (by far the most common mistake that these players make), and you really need to punish these mistakes by betting and raising when you have an edge, even if you suffer the occasionally expensive and frustrating run of bad luck.

One example from my own experience comes to mind. I'm in middle position with QT spades in a kill pot (i.e. bets are doubled after someone wins two pots in a row). Six people come in with me, and the pot is unraised. The flop comes king-jack-six with one spade on the board. I bet, hoping to buy an out, but I get all six (!) callers. Still not a bad play, since my equity is well over 18% at this point. The turn is a 5 of spades, giving me a flush draw now. I check, and a player two to my right bets out. Three people call, and of course I raise, since I surely have enough equity to justify this play. Everyone is sure that I had a monster at this point. Well, the river is a blank, everyone checks, including me, and I muck the hand immediately. Everyone looked at me like I was nuts, and I felt more than a little pissed at the time that I couldn't hit any of my outs, but that's the way it works sometimes. You've just got to grind it out and keep making these aggressive plays against loose players, and trust me. It will pay off handsomely eventually.

One additional thought. You mentioned 52s and 96s as playable hands at a loose table. Um... yikes! I know that you should loosen up your starting hand requirements, but you shouldn't loosen them up by *that* much. If your cards are low and unpaired, no-gap suited connectors are really all that's playable from middle position under most circumstances at these kind of tables. At best, I think you can play one-gap low suited connectors on the button or the cut off seat, but two gaps is a little bit too loosy-goosy.

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
One example from my own experience comes to mind. I'm in middle position with QT spades in a kill pot (i.e. bets are doubled after someone wins two pots in a row). Six people come in with me, and the pot is unraised. The flop comes king-jack-six with one spade on the board. I bet, hoping to buy an out, but I get all six (!) callers. Still not a bad play, since my equity is well over 18% at this point. The turn is a 5 of spades, giving me a flush draw now. I check, and a player two to my right bets out. Three people call, and of course I raise, since I surely have enough equity to justify this play. Everyone is sure that I had a monster at this point. Well, the river is a blank, everyone checks, including me, and I muck the hand immediately. Everyone looked at me like I was nuts, and I felt more than a little pissed at the time that I couldn't hit any of my outs, but that's the way it works sometimes. You've just got to grind it out and keep making these aggressive plays against loose players, and trust me. It will pay off handsomely eventually.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good post - however, if everyone is really sure you have a monster, you should have bet the river. I know it is tough to bluff 3 players in a low limit game, but how many bets were in the pot, maybe 15 bets? I think a bluff would have likely worked at least 1/15 of the time there.

Rob

Re: Small Stakes Hold\'em (Skalnsky, Miller & co)
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I look now at the book DS explains that a low suited pocket card is very well playable on middle to late position.

He might be right, but one thing isn't said at this place; you get a very tough decision after the flop with cards like that. Per se, you've got pocket 9h/6h and the flop hits 9s/7d/3h... you've got top pair with no flush draw and just a small chance for straight.. and 2 outs for a set or quad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ed will be one of the first to say that he has issues with hand charts, and actually has said so on his site, since people look at them and just mimic what is in the chart.

SSHE has charts for loose games and tight games, but in reality, there should be 10 charts, 15 charts, whatever....

Situations always change when you are playing and 2 tables are never exactly the same. Because of this, the main premise of what SSHE tries to teach is WHY you should play a hand a certain way. I have had several people ask me about SSHE and one of the first things I always tell them is that they can't expect to just read the book and apply the charts blindly and expect to win. A player needs to understand the concepts behind which the charts were created. Overall a table may have the exact same composition of players, but certain hands will play differently based on your relative position to certain players at the table.

SSHE has been the micro and small stakes bible for so long, yet the games have changed. Some points n the book do not apply as much as they used to, but there is still tons of great info and will continue to be the low limit bible for quite some time still.

Live games still play right into this books strengths. I typically play 6/12-20/40 and this book very much applies to these games. One last thing I will add....If you do no see why at loose tables, you should be opening up you starting hand requirements, you really need to take a step back and re-evaluate the game of poker, how well you really understand it, and exactly where/who the money comes from.