NL Theory & Pactice or Profesional No Limit?

[phydaux]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't read the OP or any of the replys, but the answer is PNL.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, now I've read the whole thread. I stand by my answer.

I got so much more out of PNL. It isn't even funny. NLH:T&P had lots of "thought exparaments" and "tips" for playing NL hold'em, but PNL is just so much more practicle. It really helps me understand concepts like adjusting my play to my oponents stack size, and understand things like why the Rule of 5 & 10 is important.

Plus, PNL is all about playing after the flop. And that is where the mistakes are the most costly.

Now maybe I go so much out of PNL simple because I've read NLH:T&P five times. Perhaps that's true, but to be honest I had to read NLH:T&P three times just to understand a single word of it.

[EN09]

[ QUOTE ]
Now maybe I go so much out of PNL simple because I've read NLH:T&P five times. Perhaps that's true, but to be honest I had to read NLH:T&P three times just to understand a single word of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

how many times??? 8???

i have NLHT&P and am slowly diggesting some of it. my next purchase is PNL. i did pick up HOH vol 1 and have yet to crack it. i was told vol 1 was good for NL cash games. either way, i need to be playing MTT's every once in awhile for a change up.

EN

[phydaux]

No, just 5 times total.

Remember, at the time NLH:T&P and PL&NL was all there were for "advanced" NL cash game books.

By this time next year a new NL cash game enthusiast will have Harrington on Cash Games I&II, Professional No Limit I&II and No Limit Hold'em: Theory and Practice all sitting in a line on the shelf at their local bookstore.

This just ain't the old days anymore. These days the fish can smarten-up quick if they have a mind to.

[CLB]

Both are excellent and will pay for themselves many times over.

If you're on the inexperienced side right now, then I'd say PNL should be the one you tackle first. Its very well written and easy to follow. If focuses on a few concepts, all of which are very important and if you don't already have a good grasp of them then you can probably make a significant improvement in your game immediately. If your on the more experienced side then you may find that you've already started to grasp the main concepts in PNL. Reading the book will give you some new, clearer, and more concise ways to approach them but it may not be groundbreaking stuff for you.

NLTAP covers a wider range of topics but it is definitely a tougher read. More math (EV calcs) and the like. However its an excellent strat book imo. I prefer it to PNL and think that an more advanced player (by advanced here I don't mean pro, I mean "novice player who has played a lot but still has tons to learn") will get more out of it.

I voted NLHTAP in the poll.

[superkmac72]

i agree with some of the posts above, buy both and absorb what u can from both of them, i found NLTAP a little more in depth but they both are good additions to anybodys library

[mce86]

If you're an inexperienced player, start with Small Takes Holdem..its a limit book, but it breaks things down pretty well!

[BotOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're an inexperienced player, start with Small Takes Holdem..its a limit book, but it breaks things down pretty well!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if I agree with you. I just read it, because it was available at my library and I didn't get too much from it. It was interesting and they do tell about playing against people who play too many hands, but I just don't think limit strategy takes you too far since the games have such a different structure.

[Albert Moulton]

Both.

I read them in the order they came out. I can't wait for Volume 2 of PNLHE.

Some of the concepts in NLHETAP, however, are difficult to understand and apply. They are also open for debate on their effectiveness. Some of the concepts are often attacked as bad advice in the strat forums. For example, if you post some hand commentary in the strat forums with ideas like "check the flop," "open limp," "min-raise here to prime the pot," and "raise more with your aces preflop in this hand" and you'll get some pretty interesting and unflattering responses. Granted, everything in poker is situation dependent, and NLHETAP is clear that not all tactics are for all situations, but some of the tactics really are quite controversial.

FWIW, I use most of the NLHETAP concepts, including all of the controversial ones, in my live game, and I have improved considerably as a result.

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
Both.

I read them in the order they came out. I can't wait for Volume 2 of PNLHE.

Some of the concepts in NLHETAP, however, are difficult to understand and apply. They are also open for debate on their effectiveness. Some of the concepts are often attacked as bad advice in the strat forums. For example, if you post some hand commentary in the strat forums with ideas like "check the flop," "open limp," "min-raise here to prime the pot," and "raise more with your aces preflop in this hand" and you'll get some pretty interesting and unflattering responses. Granted, everything in poker is situation dependent, and NLHETAP is clear that not all tactics are for all situations, but some of the tactics really are quite controversial.

FWIW, I use most of the NLHETAP concepts, including all of the controversial ones, in my live game, and I have improved considerably as a result.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just read Phil Gordon's Little Blue Book, and he defines FPS as follows.

[ QUOTE ]
fancy play syndrome (FPS): An expensive tendency, especially evident in players who have just read Sklansky and Malmuth, to overuse "trick" plays like check-raising or semibluffing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is funny, but has some truth to it. The 2+2 books that have a lot of theory in them are really pretty advanced. Beginners trying to improve would do better with Gordon's books, Harrington's books, and a few others. ToP, NLHETAP, and PNLHE are better read after getting a foundation for basic play from some of the less theoretical books.

[umaine89]

I think both are great books and I read them in the order that they came out. But if I had to do it over again, I'd read PNL before NLHTP.