[bsheck]

[ QUOTE ]
For example, in the big Miller/Sklansky no-limit hold'em book, the authors deliberately take issue with Brunson's advice in SuperSystem to aggressively steal blinds against tight players. Without mentioning Brunson, and without addressing the types of players in the game, they say that his strategy is wrong. The logic they provide is to say that blinds are so small relative to the maximum possible pot in no-limit that it cannot be correct for blind stealing to be important. Instead, they advise to be tight about blind stealing in no-limit cash games and concentrate on trapping as the way to make money.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just incorrect. Yes, they advocate limping first in on the button, but do not state that it is the absolute correct strategy and that raising can never be correct. In the preflop section, they specifically state that limping first on the button "can definitely be okay" and then in the concepts section go on to elaborate on that concept and state why it can be a good play. Furthermore, shortly after the book came out, Ed Miller made a post on the SSNL forum where he elaborated on this topic, but stated that if he had to choose between always raising and always limping J9 on the button, he would choose to raise. So the claim that they are attacking Brunson (and I suppose others) who advocate blind stealing is just absurd. Also, I'm sure that Brunson's book is geared more towards tournament play anyway, where blind stealing IS important (as S&M concede in one of the footnotes) once the stacks get short and the antes kick in.