Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

I just finished reading this book and thought I'd post some thoughts.

As preface, I confess to a personal bias, having been an occasional student of Barry Tanenbaum’s through the years. Without question, he has the sharpest poker mind I’ve ever encountered personally (but don’t be too impressed…I don’t know that many poker pros [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]). That said, here are my general thoughts about the book:

Advanced Limit Hold ‘Em Strategy is a terrific book. More clearly than any other book I’ve read on limit hold ‘em, it provides insight into the mindset and approach of a serious professional. At its core, this book answers the question, "What does a 40-80 professional know that a 6-12 grinder doesn’t?"

ALHS is a tough book to categorize, which I fear may confuse some readers. It’s neither a theory book (though it contains some really interesting theory) nor is it a how-to “manual” like Hold ‘Em for Advanced Players or even Winning Low Limit Hold ‘Em. It doesn’t attempt to be a soup-to-nuts guide to shaping winning players and assumes that readers already play reasonably well. It is most emphatically not a beginner’s text and skips the basics that accompany 90% of poker books published today.

The book is divided into two major sections: concepts and stages.

Concepts is the more theoretical section of the book. It’s not a “theory” section in the way that Theory of Poker is. Rather, it’s where Barry discusses the meta-game objectives of the profitable professional in tough games, like remaining unpredictable, playing situationally, and maintaining balance in your game.

By far, the most important discussion in the concepts section is what Barry calls The Illusion of Action, which basically means playing in a way that makes you look like a “crazy” action player, when in fact, you’re really playing solid selective-aggressive poker. The book argues that tight-aggressive play is sufficient to soundly beat low-limit games, but as you move up, you’ll stop getting action from the better players that frequent the higher limits. Barry argues that the Illusion of Action keeps the payoffs coming your way.

The second half of the book comes closer to what you might expect from a typical poker book. Barry moves street-by-street—from pre-flop to the river—explaining the general principles he uses for determining the best play. Some of these sections have been adapted from Barry’s Cardplayer columns. For example, ALHS includes a more than 25-page section on playing the turn of out position. Much of this section was adapted from Barry’s 6-part Cardplayer series on the same topic, but it’s far easier to read in the book. It’s significantly expanded, and it’s all in here one place. In general, I find multi-part columns difficult to read. It’s far better in the longer and less choppy book format.

In terms of my own play, I found value in both the concepts and stages sections. It definitely helped me better understand and exploit position and improved my river play significantly (mostly by value betting the river more). The “Playing the Turn” chapters were also particularly helpful, as I often had trouble deciding whether to push on the turn with a marginal hand or give it up. (I still have trouble with this…but less now!)

I don’t really have significant dislikes to report. The only real trouble for many readers will be figuring out how to integrate the concepts described in this book into their playing styles. The book doesn’t show you how to “play like Barry” in a comprehensive way—as HEFAP does for Sklansky and Malmuth—and that’s tricky. Rather, it provides general concepts and some specific tactical advice that readers can use to adjust their games in a winning direction.

I cannot imagine that a decent playing reader won’t recoup his or her investment in Advanced Limit Hold Em Strategies many times over. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

thanks, good review... curious about the "illusion of action"... is it more or less vital in NL? could argue either way.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

The illusion of action in NL is even more important IMO.

The difference in limit is that its much cheaper if you are up against a monster, and many more spots come up where you get to show your hand down... Thus its easier and cheaper in limit hold em... But getting payed off in NL is even more important.

This is because in limit, often the pots are so big preflop, that even if you play tight/predictable postflop, winning the pot strategically brings so much more money than an extra bet here and there.

In shorthanded limit this is less true, because hand ranges are much wider and preflop pots are much smaller.. Illusion of action is more important shorthanded.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Barry argues that the Illusion of Action keeps the payoffs coming your way.


[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the book (even though I have a copy sitting on my desk and hope to get to it soon), but this concerns me. It has always been my belief that an illusion or action, or just a loose image, is precisely the way you don't want to play limit hold 'em. I have written extensively about this before -- see my Poker Essays books.

However, that's not exactly my concern. I've seen some stuff recently where the author (not Tanebaum) advocates an illusion of action but then proceeds to give many plays that are predicated on a tight image. So when you write:

[ QUOTE ]
By far, the most important discussion in the concepts section is what Barry calls The Illusion of Action, which basically means playing in a way that makes you look like a “crazy” action player, when in fact, you’re really playing solid selective-aggressive poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't help but think the book is going this way. In the higher limits, especially if the game is short handed, you need to make all sorts of semi-bluffing type plays and plays that your opponent fears. This is not compatible with the illusion of action.

However, I'm not saying that creating a loose image is definitely wrong, even though I believe it is. But what I am saying is that if you go ahead and create a loose image, you then need to use an appropriate strategy consistent with that image. This would include much less semi-bluffing, value betting very weak hands, and going for extra bets and raises with hands that don't normally deserve this. Notice that is different from [ QUOTE ]
playing solid selective-aggressive poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyway, when I do finally get to read this book, I'll make sure to address this topic.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Illusion of action is more important shorthanded

[/ QUOTE ]

With less players, you need to play looser to play profitably, and that requires thin bets and calls. I don't know if it is an illusion or not. But it could be argued that as the table goes to four and five handed, there is more than one loose style of winning, and no tight (20% vpip) style of winning.

Mason, I hope you post a review soon. I look forward to it. I am on the fence about buying or not buying this book.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

I reread my original post after reading yours and think I overstated things a bit--particularly with the phrase "crazy action player."

To be precise, Barry's text defines the Illusion of Action as "making enough plays that look like action (while generally still having positive expectation) that you get real action from opponents when you have the best of it."

So, it means cultivating a looser image, but certainly not a crazy loose image.

Anyway, I do look forward to reading your comments. I've always found your reviews helpful.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Mason -

I haven't read the book (I have read the other title which Barry edited - wining shorthanded strategies) but flipping through Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy and speaking with others who have read the book the Illusion of Action that Barry discusses is not the same illusion you, Heisenb3rg or myself would assume he is discussing. Barry's Illusion of Action examples were equity raises that were also covered in books like SSHE and HPFAP .

When reviewing Barry's book its best to keep in mind who Barry's coaching students generally are. The Bear is good at opening up the range of weak tight Las Vegas locals as well as helping loose passive types learn when to properly use aggression (assuming the students learn well and absorb the material of course). Advanced Limit Hold'em Strategy seems to be tailored for this audience, the Las Vegas local who is essentially trading water with his or her play.

In short Barry's Illusion of Action seems to be nothing more than proper semi-bluffing from the outside looking in (I reserve the right to be totally wrong of course since I haven't read the book nor do I plan to - I am not the target audience). It seems like a good book for someone who is having troubles with the basics of limit hold'em theory after pre-flop play - aka limit hold'em 102. I think the difference is purely semantics, Barry didn't seem to be advocating overtly loose and agressive play.


I'm looking forward to your opinion of the book.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
With less players, you need to play looser to play profitably

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
and that requires thin bets

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
and calls

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. You would prefer to get folds on may of your bets and raises.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Hi t_dog:

[ QUOTE ]
To be precise, Barry's text defines the Illusion of Action as "making enough plays that look like action (while generally still having positive expectation) that you get real action from opponents when you have the best of it."


[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you read Howard Lederer's limit section in the Full Tilt Poker Tournament book. He goes through a pretty good discussion, which applies to both tournament and non-tournament games, where he explains that you should fold some of the hands that would show a very small profit so that you can profit more on your other hands. I agree with this and think it's precisely the opposite from what you are saying.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Barry argues that the Illusion of Action keeps the payoffs coming your way.


[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the book (even though I have a copy sitting on my desk and hope to get to it soon), but this concerns me. It has always been my belief that an illusion or action, or just a loose image, is precisely the way you don't want to play limit hold 'em. I have written extensively about this before -- see my Poker Essays books.

However, that's not exactly my concern. I've seen some stuff recently where the author (not Tanebaum) advocates an illusion of action but then proceeds to give many plays that are predicated on a tight image. So when you write:

[ QUOTE ]
By far, the most important discussion in the concepts section is what Barry calls The Illusion of Action, which basically means playing in a way that makes you look like a “crazy” action player, when in fact, you’re really playing solid selective-aggressive poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't help but think the book is going this way. In the higher limits, especially if the game is short handed, you need to make all sorts of semi-bluffing type plays and plays that your opponent fears. This is not compatible with the illusion of action.

However, I'm not saying that creating a loose image is definitely wrong, even though I believe it is. But what I am saying is that if you go ahead and create a loose image, you then need to use an appropriate strategy consistent with that image. This would include much less semi-bluffing, value betting very weak hands, and going for extra bets and raises with hands that don't normally deserve this. Notice that is different from [ QUOTE ]
playing solid selective-aggressive poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyway, when I do finally get to read this book, I'll make sure to address this topic.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I am really interested in your review. I have read the boook twice, studied it a little and I like it a lot. It is one of the few non-2+2 books that I would recommend.

His definition of an Illusion of Action play is basically how to mix up your play without spewing chips. Like occasionally raising in posistion with hands you normally limp. Showing a bluff from time to time and pushing a premium draw so that your opponents don't automatically know to fold when you bet because you only bet a made hand, etc.

I really liked the section about Illusion of Action plays and he mentions them throughout the book. He also states numerous times, that if they are calling your raises anyway, then don't make any Illusion of Action plays, just keep playing tight. Illusion of Action plays are for mixing up your game when your raises get too much respect.

Mason, I think after you read the book, you won't have any problem with Barry's Illusion of Action plays. I think the entire book makes a lot of sense.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
he explains that you should fold some of the hands that would show a very small profit so that you can profit more on your other hands. I agree with this and think it's precisely the opposite from what you are saying.

[/ QUOTE ]


Interesting. I haven't read that book but it seems to me this is also the opposite of what Stox recommends in his book as well.
If it has any amount of EV at all then he typically advocates playing it/calling down with it.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he explains that you should fold some of the hands that would show a very small profit so that you can profit more on your other hands. I agree with this and think it's precisely the opposite from what you are saying.

[/ QUOTE ]


Interesting. I haven't read that book but it seems to me this is also the opposite of what Stox recommends in his book as well.
If it has any amount of EV at all then he typically advocates playing it/calling down with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be honest, I'm a bit confused on this one. I'd appreciate it if Mason (or someone who can clarify this) could take the time to provide an example where this would apply.

PJS

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've seen some stuff recently where the author (not Tanebaum) advocates an illusion of action but then proceeds to give many plays that are predicated on a tight image.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. Although I don't expect you to say, I'd guess that the author you refer to is Dave Fromm and that this is a possible reason for dumping the Fromm/Zee book.

This point of strategy seems like one that needs clarification (meaning, "I don't get it"). However, if (hypothetically) Fromm/Zee and (possibly) Tannenbaum have failed to do that to your satisfaction, I'm not hopeful.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I haven't read that book but it seems to me this is also the opposite of what Stox recommends in his book as well.
If it has any amount of EV at all then he typically advocates playing it/calling down with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

agree.. how is more folding an "illusion of action"??.. maybe the author can weigh in as i won't be surprised if his ideas have been distorted here.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

IMO skalasnky/malmuths advice about having a tight image in limit holdem is only correct under certain (most?) game conditions.
There is no way its true in all game conditions.

If the pots are frequently multiway and large preflop and your opponents will allow your tight image to manipulate and control the potsize postflop (by turning people passive to your raises).. as well as succesfully semibluff occasionally. A tight image IMO is superior to a loose image.

However, if a full ring game is playing extremly loose postflop, a tight image wont allow you to take down more pots than a loose image, so getting people to give you excess action is more important.
Although, Im not sure how the increased ability to "protect your hand" with a tight image comes into play..

In shorthanded games, winning pots due to bluff raising is not nearly as rewarding. People showdown too much, and the pots are much smaller.
The opportunity to win pots with the "first right to bluff" as well as winning more bets when you have hand are the largest source of value.

A loose agressive image both gets you more action (when you both have a hand), as well as discourages your opponents to bluff raise you without a good draw(for they fear the bluff-reraise). Your range is weak a good % of the time in shorthanded games, so people taking a lot of shots at you can be very difficult to play against.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
However, if a full ring game is playing extremly loose postflop, a tight image wont allow you to take down more pots than a loose image, so getting people to give you excess action is more important.


[/ QUOTE ]

No. You might get free cards when you raise. Your bets may not be raised when they should be. Your opponents may check to you when they should bet. They may play more straight forward against you than they might someone else. And so on.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

sorry, I didnt explain my self properly.
In the first pargraph when I said "manipulate the potsize" I meant, manipulate your opponents. Things like bet/folding in big pots (because you know they know you have a good hand and wont be raising thin on you), free cards, free showdown raises etc..

By loose games, I meant loose/agressive games. In games where they dont get passive to your raises (crazy games) BUT will go even more crazy if you tick them off.

Now that I think of it though, these games are fairly rare..
Plus will be extremly profitable anyways.

Im also biased in my outlook bceause I play primarily tough shorthanded games, where Im fully confident that a LAGier image is profitable for someone who is playing a game primarily based around thin value betting.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

I am about two thirds thru the book and the "Illusion of Action" idea Barry refers to is just a new name for ideas that have been written about for years. Namely that certain hands can be played differently depending on position and number of players; plays that might seem strange to a lesser experienced player. one example he gave is to three bet from the cutoff with Q9s against a tight, losing frustrated player who had raised from his right. Barry hit a 9 on fourth street and won a pot and showing the hand got other players to view him as foolish and lucky. He points out that isolating a predictable player in position will allow him to win that pot almost all the time but creates the illusion of action for players who don't understand how sophisticated the play really is. He also talks about making other "situational" raises like raising with JT suited once 4 or more players are in or raising with a small pair once 5 or more players are in to tie those players to the pot with overcards when you hit your sets. Nothing really new except the terminology-"Illusion of Action" I think the book is good but nothing groundbreaking.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, if a full ring game is playing extremly loose postflop, a tight image wont allow you to take down more pots than a loose image, so getting people to give you excess action is more important.


[/ QUOTE ]
No. You might get free cards when you raise. Your bets may not be raised when they should be. Your opponents may check to you when they should bet. They may play more straight forward against you than they might someone else. And so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the book or this thread, and I don't play much poker, but I'm full of opinions and here's one: Mason, your idea of high limit poker is outdated. You expect to make most of your money from moves and otherwise break even, when today's players expect to tread water with moves and get paid off with real hands.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the book or this thread, and I don't play much poker, but I'm full of opinions and here's one: Mason, your idea of high limit poker is outdated. You expect to make most of your money from moves and otherwise break even, when today's players expect to tread water with moves and get paid off with real hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Reality is that short-handed poker is so subtle, that unless you are experienced at it, you would not understand what is going on if you were watching, and even then it may be hard to see the game.

It is hardly possible to gain insight, or explain your entire strategy, in one general thread.

I think Mason created a good argument.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

The whole passage was deliberate, Dave. You might as well bold everything I say.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
one example he gave is to three bet from the cutoff with Q9s against a tight, losing frustrated player who had raised from his right.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems to be an example of trying to have it both ways. If the player is tight, then three betting with Q9s is clearly wrong. If it's a knowledegeable player who knows to loosen up on his first in raises from late position, then this play becomes borderline. If it is someone who is frustrated, then he may clearly be playing too many hands and this reraise becomes clearly correct.

[ QUOTE ]
Barry hit a 9 on fourth street and won a pot and showing the hand got other players to view him as foolish and lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]

This looks a little results oriented to me. Also, the majority of the time you three bet with a hand like this you don't make anything and you do want your opponent to fold. So showing your hand to convince your opponents that you're lucky and foolish is just bad advice to me especially since you will now be teaching your opponents to correctly call you down with hands that you would prefer them to fold.

[ QUOTE ]
He points out that isolating a predictable player in position will allow him to win that pot almost all the time but creates the illusion of action for players who don't understand how sophisticated the play really is.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, we wrote this play up almost 20 years ago with the original release of HPFAP. Second, notice that the play really didn't work so well since his opponent did not fold on the flop and that he had to catch a nine on the turn to win it. Notice that this contradicts "He points out that isolating a predictable player in position will allow him to win that pot almost all the time."

[ QUOTE ]
He also talks about making other "situational" raises like raising with JT suited once 4 or more players are in or raising with a small pair once 5 or more players are in to tie those players to the pot with overcards when you hit your sets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, these plays were first written up almost 20 years ago when HPFAP was first released.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just finished reading this book...

[/ QUOTE ]

I am amazed by the number of posters in this thread who can't say that, but did not let that stop them from offering an in-depth analysis of the book's contents. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

In the immortal refrain of the Bud Light commercial: "Dude!"

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Mason makes some great points here and what he's saying does seem to refute to some extent the validity of Tanenbaum's assertions.

TT, given the lively discussion we had previously concerning the new D&B shorthanded book, I am very interested to hear your opinions on it since I noticed earlier in this thread you have since read it. Please comment?

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

First, Bear is talking about middle-stakes, not small stakes, so that has to be kept in mind. Second, the Illusion of Action that he talks about is for making more money when you have an image that is too tight. If they fold when you raise, then your tight image may be working against you. By making Illusion of Action plays, which aren't really that loose but may appear to be loose, you'll make more on your very good hands. Mostly it's opening your hand range and making thin raises and reraises in position against certain opponents, when the entire table is watching. He also tries to create an image with his table demeanor, even though he doesn't write about that in his book.

Much of the book is as much mind-set as pure strategy. As TT said well, his audience is made up of weak-tights who aren't aggressive enough. Barry is trying to get them out of their comfort zones. Most 2+2ers don't need it, obviously, but we aren't his target audience. Most of us already play an attacking, aggressive game like he wants his readers to play.

His goal is to make your opponents become predictable as you become unpredictable to them. In this, I think he does it well.

It's a very good book, and I think the world of the poker E.F. Hutton. He's one of my very favorite people. Even if I didn't know him, I'd be impressed with the book. It's a good read. I think also you'll give it a good review, too, Mason. I look forward to it.

CJ

ps--Barry is going to be on my show in the next week or so. I'll keep an eye on this thread for things to ask him.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

When I read about "illusion of action", I get reminded of John Fox "Play Poker, Quit Work and Sleep Till Noon" where he talks about a guy named ASQ (p.58-59) who intentionally makes a few suboptimal plays to make others believe that he is a fish, so they do everything they can to get into a game with him.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Hi. One quick point: ALHS does not deal in any way with shorthanded poker.

-barryt

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Hi. I am certain they have. But my view is that the author has weighed in by writing 80,000 words with explanations and specific requirements for when, why, and how to make specific play types.

It is impossible to say, "No,this guy or that guy generalized my comments." because it is tough to summarize without leaving out the subtilties that, in my opinion, define when a play may be +EV and when it will not.

Anyway, thanks to all for discussing my book, even those who have not read it. Perhaps they will feel differently if/when they do, and perhaps not.

-barryt

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

This was a very good review by OP, looking forward to reading this.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]


Anyway, thanks to all for discussing my book, even those who have not read it.

[/ QUOTE ]

My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

I'm halfway through the book. A couple points.

This discussion on "Illusion of Action" is getting too much attention. Basically what he is saying is that you shouldn't be too predictable.

Keep in mind, the book is about "tough games". There is only a little overlap between this and Stox's book. That's primarily because, although the titles are similar, Stox is about short-handed primarily and Tanenbaum is about full ring. Theoretically full ring ought to play like short-handed once the first 3 or 4 people fold, but we know this isn't precisely true in practice.

Tanenbaum addresses issues where you are playing the same opponents for long enough to know their styles and they to know yours. Unpredictability is important and in fact, he claims, is one of the major things that distinguishes good higher limit players from low-mid limit players who merely play solid. He is not talking about playing "wild" or anything of that nature really.

I think a good analogy is counting cards in Blackjack. There is a game theoretical optimum strategy. However in practice you can't employ it because you'll get knocked out for counting cards. So, you have to hide your intentions, while actually still playing as close as you can to correct game theory. You give up a little in theory to gain compared to getting detected by the casino.

And so it is against good poker players. You have to conceal what you're doing to a certain extent, while still playing good poker overall.

We might ask again, why play in "tough" games to begin with, if game selection is so important? Because you can make more winning 1 BB/hr in a $30/60 game than you can winning 3 BB/hr in an $8/16 game.

I like the book so far.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

If it's for full ring and known opponents, does it even apply that much online?

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't help but think the book is going this way. In the higher limits, especially if the game is short handed, you need to make all sorts of semi-bluffing type plays and plays that your opponent fears. This is not compatible with the illusion of action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what you mean here. This is part of the illusion of action as I understand he means it.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
If it's for full ring and known opponents, does it even apply that much online?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, my thinking was that it applied a little less for online. Unless, obviously, you're playing at the same site against the same players a lot, which is actually what would happen if you were playing the higher limits like $30/60. But there really isn't much going on in terms of full ring games at those limits. I will occasionally get in a $10/20 full game online. I used to play in a full game occasionally at $30/60 at Ultimate Bet, but that was over a year ago.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't help but think the book is going this way. In the higher limits, especially if the game is short handed, you need to make all sorts of semi-bluffing type plays and plays that your opponent fears. This is not compatible with the illusion of action.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure what you mean here. This is part of the illusion of action as I understand he means it.

[/ QUOTE ]

He means that he expects to have fearful opponents who don't routinely follow Sklansky's advice to semi-bluff reraise your semi-bluff raises. A game with fearful opponents is no longer realistic. A game with opponents marginally less aware of edges IS realistic.

However, if the book is more suitable for live play, maybe those weak conditions still apply and Tanenbaum's advice is slightly contradictory. Interesting.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Hi Adman:

Again I have not yet read this book and probably shouldn't comment (much) on it until that happens. I now hope to get to it sooner rather than later (as originally planned), and when I do, even though my formal review won't appear here, everyone will quickly find out what my gereral opinon is.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Mason, Where will your official review appear?

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print. i find it very troubling that he uses it simlarly to our use and was privy to the part of the manuscript that few have seen.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Dave Fromm also spoke extensively about the "illusion of action" in his shorthanded "Expert Hold 'em" DVD series and that was some time back.