Sit 'N Go strategy-reviews?

[Galwegian]

BTW, a common complaint from the haters about the publication of the book is that neither David nor Mason is "well versed in SNG play". I just wonder if anyone actually bothered to check this before making that statement? (Seeing as we are all supposed to check everything with the appropriate authorities and all)

[baltostar]

Before blackize and other STT forum demagogues completely trash Collin's reputation, I suggest that those of us without ulterior motives who have actually read the book offer an objective alternative.

I just finished the book and as I stated above it is mostly standard advice. The chief danger in modeling your play based only on the book is that you'll be easily identified as a standard player if you regularly play at levels where the same perceptive pros show up again and again at your table. But how many are doing that ?

Considering that there weren't any SnG books out there before this one, should people really get worked up about a few misconstructed hands and errors in logic ? Collin's book is far better than could be expected on average, and is worthy of the 2+2 label.

This is a great read for those beginning-intermediate players that have been learning SnGs by trial-and-error, and it is a great lead-in to a PokerXFactor membership.

I'm not a great SnG player, but I think I understand all the concepts, even the advanced concepts. I've studied all PxF SnG videos multiple times. There's nothing in Collin's book that contradicts the basics of how PxF teaches SnGs. The stuff Sheets, et al, get into that you wouldn't figure from Collin's book is mostly tricky and very context-specific stuff. It would only confuse most readers to include it in a basic text on SnGs.

What do the STT forum geniuses want ? A book chock full of footnotes on every page such as "f1.2.11 Note that 2p2 STT forum regular blackize disagrees with turn bet sizing on this hand" ?

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that STTF really (collectively) emabarassed themselves with much of the reaction to this book (there are some notable exceptions - and Slim Pickens wrote a well thought out review of the book for STTF), and its pretty clear that 2+2 were perfectly correct in not seeking advice from that forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have to remember that the SNG format hasn't been around that long and this could explain the huge differences in attitude (and maturity) when compared to the other 2+2 strategy forums. My best guess is that Slim Pickens is a bit older (and more mature) than the majority, and hence the "well thought out review".

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
Over the last 3 decades, has anyone ever listened to what Sklansky has had to say solely on the basis of checking into his live play results (or even got the word on his rep from the pro poker playing community) and being impressed with what they found out ?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL all too true. Sklansky writes books that are not incorrect. So what? There's more to writing effective books than saying things that are not incorrect. Some of the comments in this thread are a joke.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And how many of Ed Miller's/ David Sklansky's/ Mason Malmuth's/ Ray Zee's/ David Fromm's/ Geoff Herzog's etc etc etc PT databases or personal playing records have been provided to a bunch of nobody's on a poker forum for approval before they were "allowed" to release poker literature that meets with the forums approval?

[/ QUOTE ]

All those people you mentioned have established themselves as respected strategists before releasing a book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh really? How did Sklansky do that?

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
You think that wanting to know that the writer of a SNG book is a winning player is idiocy?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but trashing the book because you can't find out is. And keeping your online handles a secret is not.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And how many of Ed Miller's/ David Sklansky's/ Mason Malmuth's/ Ray Zee's/ David Fromm's/ Geoff Herzog's etc etc etc PT databases or personal playing records have been provided to a bunch of nobody's on a poker forum for approval before they were "allowed" to release poker literature that meets with the forums approval?

[/ QUOTE ]

All those people you mentioned have established themselves as respected strategists before releasing a book.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Sklansky and Malmuth implicitly put their stamp of approval on the book, so 'nuff said (assuming you actually accept them as "respected strategists".)

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

No, but trashing the book because you can't find out is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody trashed the book because he didn't give his name. Lots of people expressed doubt that the book would be any good because he wouldn't give out his name.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

Considering that there weren't any SnG books out there before this one, should people really get worked up about a few misconstructed hands and errors in logic ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Misconstructed hands are an issue albeit a minor one. Errors in logic are a huge problem in any poker book. Poker is a game of logic and if those processes are obscured or wrong it can go a long way to hurting the development of a player.

[ QUOTE ]
Collin's book is far better than could be expected on average, and is worthy of the 2+2 label.

[/ QUOTE ]

With nothing to compare it to how can you say this? It especially doesn't hold up when you are willing to let his mistakes slide because there are no other books on the subject.

BTW the PxF players are much much better at MTTs than SNGs. I haven't seen their videos, but I doubt they should be touted as the be all end all to SNG learning.

[ QUOTE ]

What do the STT forum geniuses want ? A book chock full of footnotes on every page such as "f1.2.11 Note that 2p2 STT forum regular blackize disagrees with turn bet sizing on this hand" ?

[/ QUOTE ]

We want someone with a clue editing, reviewing, and writing the books. That isn't to say that Colin doesn't have a clue, but his reluctance to share his name and results was not reassuring about his level of competency.

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

BTW, a common complaint from the haters about the publication of the book is that neither David nor Mason is "well versed in SNG play". I just wonder if anyone actually bothered to check this before making that statement? (Seeing as we are all supposed to check everything with the appropriate authorities and all)

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh jesus christ. When someone of greater expertise than you is available to help you with a business decision you would be stupid not to take them up on it.

If you were to go and read any of the SNG questions that Sklansky raise in the "Special Sklanksy Forum" you would see that it is clear that he is not an expert in SNG strategy.

From what I know, Mason primarily plays live and there is no reason to think that he has spent hundreds of hours running ICM calculations in order to gain the expertise necessary to verify the quality of advice in this book.