Limit books

[govman6767]

Hold em on the come

[PorkchopDJG]

To the OP if you are playing online I can't really see how SSHE will help that much. The whole book is based on playing in loose/passive games where opponents go too far with their hands. You won't find many, if any, of these types of games on the internet anymore.
I guess I might still read SSHE for knowledge as to how to play loose/passive, mainly live casino LHE games but for online I would read TOP, HPFAP and the Stox book if you want to beat online especially 6 max.

[Atrophy]

[ QUOTE ]
Inside the poker mind dosen't get nearly the love that it should get in these threads. It's a phenomenal work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes! Why don't people love it more? I'm genuinely curious about this interesting phenomenon. How can people resist the sexy photograph of John Feeney himself on the back cover!? So charming. I picked the book up a year ago and loved it, although I discovered SSHE shortly thereafter and never ended up finishing it.

Also, is the Stox book only relevant to shorthanded games, or can one apply it to FR as well?

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
To say HPFAP no longer applies is a bit silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not that it "no longer applies". It's that it's not a well written book. And I'm not just talking about fine points of grammar.

[ QUOTE ]
To say that SSHE no longer applies is also silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

To a great extent, there are fewer and fewer online games to which it does apply. Having said that, I think every Holdem player who calls himself decent should know all this theory.

[sethypooh21]

Also, HEPFAP is slightly misleading for 6 max games. The advice, when you can wade through the grammar, is solid, it's just that the hand values are calibrated to a weak-tightish FR game rather than a LAGGY-SLAGGY 6max game.

[Captain Ace]

I want to thank everyone for their suggestions. I think what Ill do is finish SSHE for the knowledge, and really concentrate on HPFAP and the Stox book. SSHE will still apply to my 3-6 live games.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To say HPFAP no longer applies is a bit silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not that it "no longer applies". It's that it's not a well written book. And I'm not just talking about fine points of grammar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. Yah, it sucks that way, but understanding it will make you money. That's really all I care about.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To say that SSHE no longer applies is also silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

To a great extent, there are fewer and fewer online games to which it does apply.

[/ QUOTE ]

This argument can be made about every poker book. I guess it's a difference of philosophy. I do not view any poker book as a complete strategy that I can play by rote. I view them all as offering advice for situations that I can apply. Concepts from HPFAP, SSHE and Winning in Tough Holdem games can all apply at the same table within a 200 hand session for example.

Also, there is a large amount of information within SSHE which is game independent if you really understand it. At lesat, from memory - I haven't read the book in years.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To a great extent, there are fewer and fewer online games to which it does apply.

[/ QUOTE ]

This argument can be made about every poker book.

[/ QUOTE ]

ITH was relevant for both live and online play when it came out, and I think it's still relevant for both live and online play. The problem with the relevancy of SSH (not the quality) is its premise - playing against loose players who play poorly after the flop (specifically by holding their hands too long.) Those players are becoming fewer and fewer online.

[ QUOTE ]
I view them all as offering advice for situations that I can apply. Concepts from HPFAP, SSHE and Winning in Tough Holdem games can all apply at the same table within a 200 hand session for example.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To a great extent, there are fewer and fewer online games to which it does apply.

[/ QUOTE ]

This argument can be made about every poker book.

[/ QUOTE ]

ITH was relevant for both live and online play when it came out, and I think it's still relevant for both live and online play. The problem with the relevancy of SSH (not the quality) is its premise - playing against loose players who play poorly after the flop (specifically by holding their hands too long.) Those players are becoming fewer and fewer online.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've never read ITH so can't comment on it. I was under the impression it was more of an introductory text. Also, although there are fewer of those players online today they still do exist and I apply conecpts found in SSHE in games I play in all of the time. These are 10/20 and 15/30 online. But, these concepts were not exclusively taught in SSHE - I was using them before the book existed.

IMO there was very little new information in SSHE to begin with. SSHE was just a much cleaner and clearer presentation of concepts found in TOP, HPFAP and Getting the Best of It (I'm pretty sure there is a couple of essay's in this book that basically lay the foundation for a lot of SSHE - but it may have been another Sklansky book). I do not mean that to be a knock on the book in any ways as it contributes a great deal to holdem literature due to compacting all of the relevant ideas into one body of work and explaining them clearer.

[masterblaker]

ITH is not really introductory per se, considering many of the hand examples come from 15-30 and higher.