View Single Post
  #14  
Old 05-01-2007, 01:03 PM
Bonified Bonified is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Slave to the grind
Posts: 471
Default Re: \"True M\" vs. Harrington\'s M: Critical Flaws in Harrington\'s M Theory

I can see what Snyder is saying here and I mostly agree with him. But at the end of the day these books are really just guidelines for the less experienced players. Have a look at the MTT strategy posts on here, or watch some of the videos on PokerXFactor, and you can see how the best players split the stack sizes into a stealing stack ; a re-stealing stack (which isn't a stealing stack because it's right for others to re-steal v you) ; and a stack that's big enough to steal again because the re-steal by an opponent is no longer efficient. This kind of thinking is what the "next level" of tournament book should aspire to and hopefully this won't come out for a while.

On the topic of "real" Ms, I've never really thought of M as being "how many rounds you have left". It's simply a measure of your stack vs the dead money in the pot, and this determines whether an open-shove (with small M) is +EV or not (along with hand strength and position), as of this hand. If a shove is +EV, I'm shoving, whether the blinds are going up in 2 hours or 2 seconds (except in some edge case where I'm UTG and the blinds are about to double or something).

In addition, both books grossly underestimate the effect of position on short-stack shoving decisions, if they mention it at all. I do like Snyder's book but his shove recommendations are wrong in particular where he's advising to shove with various hands irrespective of how many people are still to act, because this is a big factor.
Reply With Quote