What order should these be read?

[HitmanHoldem]

Over the course of the past few years I've picked up a bunch of books. I have some friends now who are getting more serious into poker, so I want to let them read my books. I feel that I may havce gained more if I had read the books in a more proper sequence. Just wondering what everyone thinks would be a good order to read these following books. I should mention that the readers are interested in both limit and NL poker, ring games and tournaments. Here are the books:

HOH I, II, III
TOP
TPFAP
HFAP
SSHE
NLHTAP
POP
Weighing the Odds
Super System

(I'm also considering purchasing the Poker Essays books, so if these are suggested readings, where should they be placed?)

[DiggerDog]

Here's my suggested order:

TOP
SSHE
HFAP
S/S (Limit Hold'em Section)
Weighing The Odds
TPFAP
S/S (No Limit Hold'em Section)
HOH I, II, III
NLHTAP

Also, if POP is Psychology of Poker, then it can be inserted just about anywhere in the list.

TMTOTB - (That's my take on these books.)

[deacsoft]

It is true that having a read some titles will aid your understanding of others. However, just reading and understanding will always dominate the need for any specific order. I'll let others list orders that helped them. I offer this: Knowing that 2+2=4 is only one thing. Knowing why 2+2=4 will provide the foundation that will allow you to add any two numbers. No matter the order you read them in don't just read and "monkey see, monkey do". Force yourself to put in the work to understand it.

[captain2man]

As a fellow rookie player- and one who has enjoyed a growing poker library...I have to respectfully disagree with reading TOP first. It's a masterpiece - and essential reading - but not for a player just starting out in studying the game...it's a notch too complex for a rookie student of the game, IMHO. I think a lot of hours at the table first will allow someone to more fully appreciate TOP.

For me, personally, as a beginning student, I've enjoyed the hold'em section in S/S, Ed Miller's GSIHE, and I don't think HOH I is too much for a beginning student.

I myself have not fully digested these books - once I have, though - I plan on taking a "study break", and just try to focus on play (not that I don't play quite a lot now as it is)...I mean - what good is studying if you don't take the time out to play & really try to apply the concepts in real-life, right? (kind of like science class v. science lab).

One book I haven't seen mentioned too much in these threads is the first Sklansky Hold 'Em Poker book....what's the general consensus on this as a starting limit book these days?....

One thing I will say - and I know this is hardly a news-flash - but it doesn't hurt to reiterate - is that studying works! For all the books that are out there - even ones that sell very well - and forums like these....if you spend many hours with those books & on these forums, you can get the false impression that everyone who plays poker is studying.

This should be obvious....but this is clearly NOT the case! In my weekly home game - a few of the guys (like me) were total beginners - interested in playing 'cause we watched it on TV - and some of the other guys were more experienced (although not necessarily students of the game).

In both my home game, and on-line, studying has made a WORLD of difference. Even just knowing one good strategy tip or idea can give you the edge....applying it in my home game has made me one of the biggest winners over the past few months - and, aside from getting more hours under my belt, there is no doubt that studying & thinking deeply about the game has made all the difference in the world.

A few of the experienced guys who have noticed this turnaround chalk it up to a month's worth of good luck. I hope they continue to think this way.

Others - mostly the newer guys - have no interest in studying - and think it's too geeky - they just want to hang out, drink some beers & have fun....not that I don't want to do all of those things, too (when home poker isn't fun - there's no longer a point) - but I have even more fun when I leave with some extra cash in my pocket - so I hope they don't change their thinking on that either.

[HitmanHoldem]

Just to elaborate slightly on the situation, the friend's of mine have been playing hold'em for years now. That doesn't necessarily dictate their level of skill and knowledge of the game, but it should be known that they are not complete amateurs to playing, just to the studying aspect of it.

To respond to deacsoft's post, I completely agree that it's more important to understand these books fully, and not just know what they say, but understand why it makes sense. The post is more or less geared to find out what people believe would be a good order in reading these books due to difficulty to understand due to content.

[Lax67]

Here's my suggestion:

Limit Path
1. SS2(limit chapter)
2. SSHE
3. TOP
4. GTOT
5. Poker Essays I II III
6. HEPFAP

NL Path
1. SS2 (NL chapter)
2. TOP
3. HOH I, II, III

* POP can be read anywhere after the first book. I've found that I read chapters from PE 1-3 and TOP everyday and read through SSHE about once a month.

I just got NLHTP this morning and haven't read it, so I can't say where it would fit in with these other books.

[jdefoe]

I found Jen harman's limit section of Limit Hold'em by explaning how to isolate the other players very helpful. However, I also learned that some of the advice is quite simple minded. For example, You hold A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] on the button in a raised pot with 4 other players.

The flop comes : 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
The first player bets, and one folds, and 2 others call. Harman says that you should just call because you want to keep people in for when you hit your hand.

However, this true, but simple minded. You should raise, because you have an equity edge, and even if you knock out other players, you can gain a free card and buy outs, since pairing your A or Q may win the pot for you. Plus, as Ed said before, in this spot you'd raise with an overpair right?

[DiggerDog]

[ QUOTE ]
I found Jen harman's limit section of Limit Hold'em by explaining how to isolate the other players very helpful. However, I also learned that some of the advice is quite simple minded. For example, You hold A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] on the button in a raised pot with 4 other players.

The flop comes : 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
The first player bets, and one folds, and 2 others call. Harman says that you should just call because you want to keep people in for when you hit your hand.

However, this true, but simple minded. You should raise, because you have an equity edge, and even if you knock out other players, you can gain a free card and buy outs, since pairing your A or Q may win the pot for you. Plus, as Ed said before, in this spot you'd raise with an overpair right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Harman is talking about playing limit hold'em at higher stakes against more experienced players. Strategy at that level would certainly be different than at the smaller stakes that Ed is covering.

This is an excellent example of what deacsoft is saying in his original post. It's very important to understand what circumstances the author is writing about so that you don't shoot yourself in the foot trying to use that strategy under circumstances where the factors involved are no longer the same.

[Steve00007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I found Jen harman's limit section of Limit Hold'em by explaining how to isolate the other players very helpful. However, I also learned that some of the advice is quite simple minded. For example, You hold A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] on the button in a raised pot with 4 other players.

The flop comes : 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
The first player bets, and one folds, and 2 others call. Harman says that you should just call because you want to keep people in for when you hit your hand.

However, this true, but simple minded. You should raise, because you have an equity edge, and even if you knock out other players, you can gain a free card and buy outs, since pairing your A or Q may win the pot for you. Plus, as Ed said before, in this spot you'd raise with an overpair right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Harman is talking about playing limit hold'em at higher stakes against more experienced players. Strategy at that level would certainly be different than at the smaller stakes that Ed is covering.

This is an excellent example of what deacsoft is saying in his original post. It's very important to understand what circumstances the author is writing about so that you don't shoot yourself in the foot trying to use that strategy under circumstances where the factors involved are no longer the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

What circumstances is the author writing about? Does Harman give any information about your opponents in this spot?

[HitmanHoldem]

Any other suggestions on the order these books should be read.