Most over-rated poker book of all time?

[chicagoY]

Cloutier=Bee Gees Greatest Hits, a real blow a rama.

[DoubleDog]

[ QUOTE ]
Cloutier=Bee Gees Greatest Hits, a real blow a rama.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. His "Good ol' boy" narratives are tedious, to say the least.

[Sushiglutton]

[ QUOTE ]
My vote is Supersystem by a long way. Will give reasons a bit later, just wondering whether their are any other contendors for this title.

I'm sure their are other worse poker books out their, Play Poker Like the Pro's by Hellmuth certainly wasn't good. I haven't read Macevoy's and Cloutiers efforts but they generally seem to be considered pretty bad too.

However these books aren't nick named "the bible of poker". Wonder how many people have gone broke following Doyles NL section.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with this. Ty for saying it out loud. The book is a joke. The modern NL-books like harrington, and Millers work are simply crushng that dinosaur. The limit holdem sectio is so awwwwful.

[Adman]

God I forgot about TJ Cloutier and Tom McEvoy's books. They are some of the worst poker literature ever.

[Montrealcorp]

"The limit holdem section is so awwwwful". for play poker like the pros.

but is it?

from the "theory point of view",yes this book isnt very "on the money".

but look at the title.....u really think a pro would play theoritically vs players who are weaker then him?
i seriously think not,i think hellmuth view point on this(i might be wrong here but it makes sense),is when your a pro,u probably play loose agressive vs worst players to "maximise" your profits,hence the section of the animals(wich i find great..)related to the kind of play he represent and makes u recognise when u are probably beat and when your not...

i made a post in other limit section about poker essay 1 from malmuth:

""On the other hand ,if your goal is to become great,playing loose will more likely get you there,assuming you dont go broke in the attempt."

now lets think,u want to play like the pros,well first play looose agressif, and to be succesfull to play like this,u need to developpe good read(hence animal section of is book).

yes,vs good players it wont work but,as written in the book,when u face a lion or a mouse,he clearly state to slow down and even not playing vs those w/o a good hands when its raise preflop.....

im not saying its the way to play,im just saying pros will play a lot looser like hellmuth prescribe in is book :

-do moves vs weak tight(wich means they know how to play poker by readings good books but still lacking some skills...)
-or totally amateurs or calling stations(meaning vs elephant,value bet like hell like he wrote....).

Dont get me wrong,and malmuth sayed it too....its not the correct way to play....but its the correct way to learn a lot to become great and its the correct way to do a lot more money vs the right kind of players(weak tight,calling station,etc...) wich u will find a lot more of those compared to the number of good players sitting at your table.
hellmuth,again,was very specific on this,learning to recognize those dangerous players and not entering with them in a pot if u dont have a great hand...

yup,im pretty sure world class players(hence they are pros..),would play a lot looser vs worst players then what the great books are sayng...they wouldnt play like the books but probably loose agressif,like hellmuth is explaining.....

i might be wrong or not very comprehensif(im not very good in english sorry,but taking in the right context,i seriuously think hellmuth book isnt that bad.....

toughts?

ps: "assuming you dont go broke in the attempt." malmuth

yes,hellmuth doesnt talk about position and good hands wich wouldnt be good in early position (22,33,etc..)and all those aspect.
But like any pro,i think they wouldnt mind playing like this since they would think they would outplayed u anyway in a lot of pot,UTG or on the button ,wouldnt matter much for them...
unless your a great player as well and then ,recognizing this,he wouldnt play loose agressif vs u then.
(as hellmuth was saying anyway in is book for the mouse or the lion(unless your an eagle) point of view...).

toughts?

PPLP would benefit more a player with good fundamentals (since he would undertsand when hellmuth play is wrong)then a total amateur/beginner OR

playing in mid+/stakes limit games...

[Montrealcorp]

ps for my last post:

i probably misread sushiglutton and i apologies.

the first quote i made about the limit section from sushiglutton was probobaly limit section for super system book,if it was then i am sorry

if is quote was for the limit section for play poker like the pros ,then i stand to what i wrote upthere

ty

[6471849653]

TJ Cloutier and Tom McEvoy's championship nl and pl book is one of my favorites, though not that I play like that from most parts but it helps with full ring play.

The most overrated book is the chiaffone and reuben pl and nl poker book, that's like an introduction, and have some pages on nl and pl holdem play if that's what one is interested about, and it has nothing to add to better known newere books, and chiaffone was about to come out with his new book but lost it as his hardware got killed and he had no safety copies (not sure if that's the case as it's rather stupid as i would automatically safety copy on cd's dvd's anything important).

So, I think these are two books where the first is one of the most underrated books and the latter one of the overrated books. Though not that I think the first one is great and the second one is garbage. But at least one thing is sure that no-one can follow anyone's recommendation to get those books or not to get, though I would for sure say not to get the c&r book but many others will say just the opposite and say the c&m book is garbage.

If one wants garbage one could try the other books of c/m that I have some and have never had any use of them, and actually haven't even completely read them, much less study them as they have nothing worth it to study but are saying like you can't play AQTx type of a hand especially if it's not suited; so one learns that it being suited is important. Nothing of that is of course of any use when playing shorthanded, or when the first players have folded.

[brick]

Worst poker book ever >>> Championship Tournament Poker by McEvoy

[stupoman44]

I agree the McElvoy tourney book is over-rated.
I would also add the "Little green book" by Phil Gordon. Not that it really had any respect by the poker community, but it was hyped a lot when it came out and I found it to be utterly worthless and resold it on Amazon quickly.

[6471849653]

Little green book" by Phil Gordon still has its place and is worth the money, though not that I view it so much as a tournament book other than maybe for the rounds where the games have loosened up somewhat, but I view it more from the cash game view and being myself a shorthanded player (limit and nl) it fits better to my style, and it has some good tips. Nl can be played in so many ways compared to limit, so it's not for everyone, and for flop play it's rather basic (as is his preflop strategy, but that is just a basic book, something like ss2's limit holdem chapter that though has a top level preflop strategy, with more advanced things missing though) as one should have a great flop strategy, but it does put things on position and being the aggressor or not being the aggressor (and bet sizes, though not that I agree with anything in it and won't play accordingly as it all depends of the opponent and the flop type), so that together with his open-raise or fold preflop strategy makes it support the views that a limit holdem and a shorthanded nl holdem player could actually play like that.