SSHE is the nuts!

[Adman]

Sorry, just one more thing. I am not trying to pass myself off as some kind of expert! Far from it, I'm just trying to express my opinions on the game and learn from this discussion like everyone else. I am an intermediate student of the game and have a lot to learn. I may very well be totally wrong so please correct me if I am! I'm definitely not Ed Miller, David Sklansky or Matthew Hilger so far be it from me to say which parts of their books are "right or wrong." Just offering my perspective on the discussion.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
Internet Texas hold 'em is a great book too but I do find Matthew Hilgers pre flop strategy a little too passive for my liking. I would never open limp JJ or TT etc (in fact I never open limp any hand). If I do play AQ against a raise I am going to 3 bet or fold. I don't like cold calling and I try to never ever do it. Other than that type of advice I really do love that book too.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a small grain of truth there, but only a small one. First, some of those recommendations are for beginners, and the beginners section is where you'll find it. If a beginner is losing money, that is certainly not the reason.

Second, such examples, which occur rarely and where the player is making a very small mistake (if any), are not really very important. In fact Miller himself says that debating the minor differences in starting hand play is not important. Of course he then can't resist discussing the wisdom of cold calling with AQ, but that's the nature of poker players. The fact is I made a lot of money with AQ cold calling with it as a beginner, so I just don't think it's very important. It probably represents less .1% of your success as a limit holdem player. Feeney, in Inside The Poker Mind, uses AQ as a sort of litmus test for your approach to the game. In that context it's fine. But ITH certainly does not teach you to be passive by any means, except for a couple minor preflop scenarios in the beginner section. The book teaches tight/aggressive play that will beat the online game still today.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
In terms of this thread, most of the concepts in both Small Stakes and ITH are relevant whether you play in loose games or tight games, small stakes or high stakes. Tight games are never always tight and loose games never always loose. To be a good limit player you need to know how to adjust to game conditions and to hand conditions. I’m sure many, many high stakes players have benefitted from some of the concepts discussed in SSH.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe every concept in SSH was already raised in ITH, if you go through the hand examples. Look for hands with 4-6 or more to the flop and study them. There are fewer examples with this many players on the flop in ITH than in SSH, due to the nature of SSH. But the ideas are all there.

SSH is a great book not because of the revolutionary nature of the ideas, but because it focused on problems specifically related to loose players, and then explained the concepts very well. But as Matt says, those conditions exist from time to time at any limit and virtually any game. This is why I always snicker when I see someone saying that free momey poker, for instance, is a complete waste of time. It is. Unless you want to be a good, well-rounded poker player who really understands poker theory, psychology, and changing game conditions.

The 20-22% flops Matt talks about are now showing up in games as low as .50/$1. It doesn't mean the games can't be beaten, and it takes more than just tightness for your opponents to be good players.

[Cactus Jack]

How many people read SSHE only one time? Or two? How many have read it several times over over the period of years since it's come out? Each category will believe a different thing about the book.

SSHE cannot be absorbed in one reading. Or three, unless you're playing a lot and going over hands you've played when you reread it. What makes it such a superb book is no matter how many times you read it and how many hands you've played, there is always something else in it that makes you go, "oh."

Matt is so right, as I would expect him to be. Everything in the game is based on adjusting to the conditions of the game. That's the difference between a very good player and an inexperienced player. The very good player can adjust to a changing table before anyone else is even aware it's changed, if they even could be aware of it.

I was told to learn the starting hand charts and someday you'll wake up and realize you're no longer playing the same hands as you did. If you start to lose it, go back to the basics. If you know the basics, you can do it easily. If not, then you have no baseline to draw on when it comes to fixing leaks. SSHE does this very, very well. That's why it's the classic that it is.

Lee Jones' Winning Low Limit Poker is a good book for beginners, as is Matt's book. In fact, I recommend them to people who want to learn to play, instead of SSHE. But once they've played awhile, then SSHE should be their guide.

my dos centavos

CJ