[Win.by.TKo]

It's funny how previous posters referenced Chess & Backgammon as games to compare to poker. Not surprisingly, Harrington was a master at ALL THREE GAMES.

Chess has an equivalent book to HoH; Reassess Your Chess (J. Silman). It essentially sets up a backbone for formulating plans during the middlegame. It gives you a broad system to utilize. It is obviously not the end all to chess, but it lays another foundation for future play, reading and study to build on.

In both games, everybody has a unique style of play that opponents must figure out. They take their knowledge of the game along with the knowledge of their opponent to place opponents in uncomfortable situations that lead to difficult decisions.

I have played tournament poker and tournament chess, but not tournament backgammon, but see the similarities. All games are a mix of styles and situations to achieve an ultimate goal.

I must admit that there is a ton of money in poker compared to chess. Also, chess has a difinitive rating system, where poker does not. The ratings can give you an idea on how strong your opponent is (if you want to know it. I personally avoid learning my opponents rating to prevent being 'beaten before going to the board.) Poker has no such luxury (or curse). You must figure this out at the felt.

Bottom line is that HoH is a solid book to build a tournament foundation for other books to build on, but it cannot stand alone.