Small Stakes Hold 'em

[DiamondDog]

Harrington On Hold-Em Volume 1;
No Limit Hold Em Theory and Practice;
Mastering No Limit Hold Em by Fox and Harker;
Professional No Limit Hold'Em Volume 1

These are all worth reading IMO.

[Farfenugen]

The "Will Seven Card Stud for Advanced Players help my NLHE game?" threads are getting old.

[Bluefish7]

The "Will Seven Card Stud for Advanced Players help my NLHE game?" threads are getting old.

.... sorry this is my first visit to this site and first question .. sorry for boring you !!

[Bluefish7]

Thanks for the feedback so far ... I'll definately be looking at the books mentioned.

I've also found a book called .. "How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold'em " by Sam O'Connor .. anyone read / rate this one ?

Cheers

[DiamondDog]

This is only one of several reviews of that book on these forums: review

The search facility will help you find others.

[daveT]

[ QUOTE ]
It is mainly for Limit, but in the introduction it does state "the advice is not limit-specific". Thick book packed with great advice and you WILL get an insight into how small stakes players, be it NL or L, play. Mines dog eared and I mainly play NL.

[/ QUOTE ]

You did put the dash in, so that changes the meaning.

Limit Specific would mean what you imply.
Limit-specific would mean that it does not matter what limit you play, as long as the fish hop around the same. Ie, it was saying it does not matter if you play 2/4,3/6,4/8, or even 20/40 if the players play as the book describes.

I do agree that the small stakes capped NL games are not too different than the small stakes limit games.

[jeffnc]

SSHE is only about Limit poker, but not related to any particular dollar limit of Limit poker.

The books to get for NL cash would be Largay, Flynn (PNL), and Miller/Sklansky (NLTAP). Between the 3 you'll have a good foundation. However PNL Vol 2 and Harrington are coming out soon, and they should round out things.

How to Dominate is a strange little book which will have some good advice for some players. I call it strange because
- it has some technical errors (bad)
- it has a mix of "old school" anecdotes (neither good nor bad, but unusual, an I think good)
- it wants you to play a certain low variance style of poker only, which is either neutral or negative depending on your point of view. I consider it a negative.