Worst Two Plus Two Poker Book Ever!

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Daliman:

First off I think you meant PokerFarce and PokerTruth not Poker Tournament Strategies.

With that said the book was an experiment for us. I happened to like it, especially the history sections, and I knew the late author fairly well. I also do know others who liked it as well. However, some people don't like, and a few, like yourself, dislike it intently.

One thing though that everyone needs to keep in mind is that this is not a strategy book. So in that sense it does not violate our standards for strategy books. In addition, it proved to be a poor seller and with hindsight wasn't worth our time, effort, and expense to publish. We still have some copies left but will not reprint it when they are gone. But its sales rate is now very small so we may have it available for a while.

As for Poker Tournament Strategies, we published this book in 1998. At that time there was virtually nothing out on poker tournaments. In addition, and I assume this is still true today, there were many tournaments in the Los Angeles area and other places that had "funny" buy-in structures. We went ahead with this book because it does a good job of explaining these structures and how to approach them.

But unfortuantely the text had a number of writing issues even though we had a top professional editor go over the English. So we got many complaints about the writing and how the book was put together.

In 2004, because of the poker boom, we decided to go ahead and do a second edition. Most of the writing problems were cleaned up and unlike the first edition we have received almost no complaints in this area.

You need to understand that Poker Tournament Strategies is a beginners book whose main value is how to approach these funy re-buy tournaments. I only recommend it as supplemental reading especially since other books, like the Harrington series, have now come out.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Let me make this very clear, it is unethical for a publisher or author to post reviews on their own books on amazon and we abide by that. We do not go to sites like Amazon and put up sales pitches and do not appreciate the imnplication that we might have done something like that.

What may be happening is that the review which is better, based on its date, may be reflecting the fixing of the writing problems for the second edition. We made a decision not to change the ISBN number since we did not want to encourage any previous purchasers of the first edition to also buy the second edition even though it is now written much better. The reason for this is that the second edition doesn't contain any new strategy information.

If you look at the negative reviews they all have dates before 2004 which means that the first edition was being addressed.

MM

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me make this very clear, it is unethical for a publisher or author to post reviews on their own books on amazon and we abide by that. We do not go to sites like Amazon and put up sales pitches and do not appreciate the imnplication that we might have done something like that.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am glad ethic > profit for you. Unfortunately most publishers dont have their values in that order [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Al Mirpuri]

[ QUOTE ]
I can only assume that many of the people voting for TOP were joking or just didn't care but wanted to see the results.

[/ QUOTE ]

People who just wanted to see the poll could have voted for any book so why did the people who chose TOP choose TOP?

[Al Mirpuri]

[ QUOTE ]
If we are going to pick on these Harrington flaws, what about the big Ten-to-One rule?

It just seems to me, that people on the short stack are going to be desperate and simply happy to doubled up through a man pushing on random cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Friend,

This reasoning does not appear right. You have ten times the big blind and need to double up. If smaller stacks are going to call with worse hands than yours (and you are still playing good, though not necessarily premium, hands not random cards) then you are going to beat them. Yes, you will take hits and even get busted out but that is to be expected...If you do nothing you will be blinded to death. On the other hand, you will take the blinds regularly and bust some of those desparadoes and get to a position where you do not need to be raising allin preflop and get back to playing premium hands and using all your poker skills.

Harrington is not advocating playing random cards as I understand it. He wants you to go to war with good hands as well as the premium ones.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If we are going to pick on these Harrington flaws, what about the big Ten-to-One rule?

It just seems to me, that people on the short stack are going to be desperate and simply happy to doubled up through a man pushing on random cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Friend,

This reasoning does not appear right. You have ten times the big blind and need to double up. If smaller stacks are going to call with worse hands than yours (and you are still playing good, though not necessarily premium, hands not random cards) then you are going to beat them. Yes, you will take hits and even get busted out but that is to be expected...If you do nothing you will be blinded to death. On the other hand, you will take the blinds regularly and bust some of those desparadoes and get to a position where you do not need to be raising allin preflop and get back to playing premium hands and using all your poker skills.

Harrington is not advocating playing random cards as I understand it. He wants you to go to war with good hands as well as the premium ones.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't believe he was referring to pushing light when your M is 10 or less. The Ten-to-One rule he was referring to is found in HoH2.

It basically says that Harrington will put a player all in with any 2 cards if he has more than ten times as many chips as the other player (HoH2, p.287).

[Al Mirpuri]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If we are going to pick on these Harrington flaws, what about the big Ten-to-One rule?

It just seems to me, that people on the short stack are going to be desperate and simply happy to doubled up through a man pushing on random cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Friend,

This reasoning does not appear right. You have ten times the big blind and need to double up. If smaller stacks are going to call with worse hands than yours (and you are still playing good, though not necessarily premium, hands not random cards) then you are going to beat them. Yes, you will take hits and even get busted out but that is to be expected...If you do nothing you will be blinded to death. On the other hand, you will take the blinds regularly and bust some of those desparadoes and get to a position where you do not need to be raising allin preflop and get back to playing premium hands and using all your poker skills.

Harrington is not advocating playing random cards as I understand it. He wants you to go to war with good hands as well as the premium ones.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't believe he was referring to pushing light when your M is 10 or less. The Ten-to-One rule he was referring to is found in HoH2.

It basically says that Harrington will put a player all in with any 2 cards if he has more than ten times as many chips as the other player (HoH2, p.287).

[/ QUOTE ]

Dear JBrochu,

I owe you a big thank you. I was mistaken and you threw light onto my ignorance.(I do have all three Harrigton books!) You are quite correct in what you say.

Addressing the situation anew, I think that Harrington is right when even if your opponent knows what you are doing he is still going to run into a premium hand at some point and has to fear being put all in. Against tight-weak players and players hoping to fold their way into money or more money it is even more powerful a tool.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Daliman:

First off I think you meant PokerFarce and PokerTruth not Poker Tournament Strategies.

With that said the book was an experiment for us. I happened to like it, especially the history sections, and I knew the late author fairly well. I also do know others who liked it as well. However, some people don't like, and a few, like yourself, dislike it intently.

One thing though that everyone needs to keep in mind is that this is not a strategy book. So in that sense it does not violate our standards for strategy books. In addition, it proved to be a poor seller and with hindsight wasn't worth our time, effort, and expense to publish. We still have some copies left but will not reprint it when they are gone. But its sales rate is now very small so we may have it available for a while.

As for Poker Tournament Strategies, we published this book in 1998. At that time there was virtually nothing out on poker tournaments. In addition, and I assume this is still true today, there were many tournaments in the Los Angeles area and other places that had "funny" buy-in structures. We went ahead with this book because it does a good job of explaining these structures and how to approach them.

But unfortuantely the text had a number of writing issues even though we had a top professional editor go over the English. So we got many complaints about the writing and how the book was put together.

In 2004, because of the poker boom, we decided to go ahead and do a second edition. Most of the writing problems were cleaned up and unlike the first edition we have received almost no complaints in this area.

You need to understand that Poker Tournament Strategies is a beginners book whose main value is how to approach these funy re-buy tournaments. I only recommend it as supplemental reading especially since other books, like the Harrington series, have now come out.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, of course, I meant PFAPT, not PTS. Sorry about that. FWIW, bad decisions happen all the time in business. There's nothing worng at all with extend yourself a bit, it just didn;t work out in this case.

I'm pretty sure I have almost every other book you have out, however, and enjoy them all.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
As for Poker Tournament Strategies, we published this book in 1998. At that time there was virtually nothing out on poker tournaments. In addition, and I assume this is still true today, there were many tournaments in the Los Angeles area and other places that had "funny" buy-in structures. We went ahead with this book because it does a good job of explaining these structures and how to approach them.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've made no bones about what I think of this book. Anyone who plays say, 5 tourneys, and thinks in depth a little bit, probably wouldn't gain much from this book. For a total newbie, it might be useful. Like fundamentals of holdem. I still wouldn't recommend it.

One of my main contentions is the reprinting of 5 pages at the end of (literally) every chapter(I might be exaggerating as it's been a long while since I read it. But I do remember it being a coupla pages at least. Might even be more pages.)

I understand driving a point home, but c'mon. It almost seems like filler after the 4th time you come across it, then you see it 3 or more times after that. That 'filler' part seems to fill about 1/4-1/3 of the book.

b

[fungaimike56]

Any and all 2+2 book PURCHASED ten years ago. Creel Printers did a lousy job. My FIRST copies of Hold 'em Poker For Advanced Players, Seven Card Stud For Advanced Players, Gambling Theory and Other Topics, Poker Gaming and Life and Theory of Poker all fell apart within a year. Bad binding.