View Single Post
  #10  
Old 06-07-2007, 04:29 PM
JLD JLD is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19
Default Re: mathematics of poker X months later?

I really liked the book as well. I have an econ background and comfortability with math which may have made it somewhat easier. What I really liked about the book was the discussion of opponent's hand ranges and your likely equity against them (similar to Phil's G-Bucks article in Bluff magazine awhiel back). The other thing I liked was the discussion of continuation betting which was a more theoretical discussion of last month's excellent 2+2 article on the success of continuation betting with various flops and # of opponents.

I think the book helped reinforce the importance of putting my opponent on a hand range and deciding to act based upon that. In short, I think it helped me think about poker more deeply.

As comparison, I have read both NLHTAP and Largay and found both helpful in their own way as well. I think much of what has been discussed about Largay on this board has been taken out of context or are relatively minor points compared to his main messages. I am very anxious to read the upcoming PNL. From my view, I think one of the key missing discussion topics which could make an excellent book is betting patterns by opponent type. I think this is one of the key benefits that experience provides to better players.
Reply With Quote