Chan right about HPFAP?

[chicagoY]

Pardon my ignorance, I loved HPFAP and read it three times, but in a review on here posted by Maurile (thanks!) Terrence Chan said,

"the 'I want to memorize a chart of starting hands and make poker into basic BJ strategy' crowd--Those people are busy reading HPFAP and getting slaughtered in 15/30 games across the internet...it's a fine book for 1999 or whenever, but Mason's refusal to admit that there's anything at all wrong with the book rubs me the wrong way. Anyone who plays as advised in the book is going to miss value bets, miss bluffs and lay down way too often. They're not going to be able to beat any but the truly softest of games."

Is there any truth to this?
I have to ask because my focus has been almost exlusively NL for 1.5 years. What's the major thing wrong with HPFAP? chan post

[amulet]

there us something wrong with EVERY book. however, hpffa is a great book. it will make anyne who studies it a much improved player. while there may be no perefect books, hpfap is one of the best.

the authors don't acvocate memorizing the starting hands once you have a little experience. as you feel more comfortable, you will judge each hands value by itself, based on position, the cards, the opponents, the game, the situation, etc.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi chicagoY:

The hand group charts in our book tell you virtually nothing. All they are is a shorthand which allowed us to shorten the accompanying text on starting hand play. So instead of approximately 35 pages we would have had to write many more without the charts.

When people like T Chan write:

[ QUOTE ]
the 'I want to memorize a chart of starting hands and make poker into basic BJ strategy' crowd

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is out of jealousy since our book isn't anything like this.

Best wishes,
Mason

[chicagoY]

Thank you Mason, I really loved it and need to go back over it another time.

[Yoon Zilla]

I remember reading somewhere in which David Sklansky said he would cringe each time someone would tell him that they had the starting hand rankings memorized. LOL

[George Rice]

David said that right here on 2+2 a few years ago, if memory serves.

Also, I believe the best "book" for beating the online 15/30 - 30/60 (and sometimes higher) holdem games is Small Stakes Holdem.

[skillzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I believe the best "book" for beating the online 0,1/0,2 - 0,5/1 (and sometimes higher) holdem games is Small Stakes Holdem.

[/ QUOTE ]

sshe advice doesnt really work all that well when players get agressiveand the pots get small and heads up

[smbruin22]

[ QUOTE ]
sshe advice doesnt really work all that well when players get agressiveand the pots get small and heads up

[/ QUOTE ]

i'd like to flesh this out further.... seems like alot of low limit games are fairly loose, but quite aggressive these days. i seldom see the classic LP conditions which i think SSHE is predicated on... SSHE does have alot of good general stuff though

[siegfriedandroy]

[ QUOTE ]
David said that right here on 2+2 a few years ago, if memory serves.

Also, I believe the best "book" for beating the online 15/30 - 30/60 (and sometimes higher) holdem games is Small Stakes Holdem.

[/ QUOTE ]

SSHE is another very good 2plus2 book, but it, again, is no where near enough to beat games that high.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I remember reading somewhere in which David Sklansky said he would cringe each time someone would tell him that they had the starting hand rankings memorized. LOL

[/ QUOTE ]


If I meet him I might try it out myself just to see the cringing.