Professional No-Limit Hold 'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
well some quotes from the book my friend is giving me over aim

friend: if you raise preflop so that your remaining stack in in a medium range, like 11 or 13 times the pot on the flop, it will be awkward to play a top pair or overpair hand.
friend: You can't get all-in fast enough to want to commit on the flop, but you aren't deep enough to feel good about letting it go.
friend: You bet near pot on flop and get called, or you bet pot and get raised you're basically making an all-in decision, but you don't have a whole lot of information to tell you whether you're committed or not.
friend: If you raise more so the spr is something like 4, you bet, get raised all-in and you have a no-brainer decision. KK overpair getting 3-1 to call all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quoted in a vacumn, please read the book before you become even more confused than you already are.

[phydaux]

[ QUOTE ]
well some quotes from the book my friend is giving me over aim... sounds like they are recommending exactly what i inferred, and i think thats a very bad way to approach poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, 'cause there's no possible way your friend might misunderstand what the authors are saying, or be providing you those quotes out of context.

If I were you I've never read this book. In fact, if I were you I'd throw away every 2+2 book in my colection.

Stick with Ken Warren books. He'll show you the real way to play no limit hold'em.

[m3dude]

is a 10nl player trying to teach me about poker?

[sputum]

[ QUOTE ]
is a 10nl player trying to teach me about poker?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, just about reviewing books and actually kinda reading them first and stuff

[tightymcfish]

I just finished reading the book. I think this book gives a pretty decent recipe for playing soft live games (e.g. bet an amount preflop so that the flop is easier to play,etc). The book's advice imho is terrible for the tough online games. I already read through this and have thought of at least 3 ways you can find out within a couple thousand hands who is trying to implement this and what to do to exploit it (no i won't say how because it is very easy to do if you read the book.)

The book complete ignores the fact that in the tough online games and I am not talking 1/2 or 2/4, the games are so aggro and the players are such good hand readers that people just won't put their stack in against a player who all he does is smash the pot bottom because his SPR told him to commit to his to pair or overpair hand.

I think the author assumes you are playing against a bunch of donkeys. Because a good player will adjust quickly agains this strategy and just not pay you off enough. No matter what SPR you achieve.

I don't find the book horrible but I think it gives a fake sense of security to those who want a quick cookbook recipe to beat poker.

[tightymcfish]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a hand I played today, my first session after reading PNL (cross-posted in SSNL):

1/2 NL. Table is loose and pretty deep. I am 300BB deep with 99 UTG. I bump it to $10. Normally I limp, but taking SPR into account and expecting several callers I'm able to get the preflop pot to $60.

Flop is Ts9h5h. BB blind leads out for $20. I raise $120, effectviely putting him all-in. Normally I'd raise less, but with loose players behind me I want them to pay to much for whatever hands they may want to make. The button, who has me covered, calls, and BB folds. We are now heads up in a $320 pot.

Turn is a 7d. I lead for $200 and get put all in. I'm not terribly pleased, but with $270 to call for a $990 pot (plus what I knew about the player), the decision was easy.

That hand clarified the logic behind planning bet sizes that PNL discusses. In the past I would have had a much more troubling river decision and/or wouldn't have maximized the value on my set.

It's also interesting to observe how poorly players choose their bet sizes, folding when they've committed over half their stack and there's twice as much (or more) in the pot than they have left.

At the very least, the info in the book kept me focused on hands I wasn't involved in, since it gave me a new criteria for evaluating players I had already formed opinions about.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you really needed the book to help you with this river decision you need to reevaluate your game.

[Jan]

[ QUOTE ]
This is driving me mad that some people have had this book read already and I can't get it. Barnes and Noble says that it is showing backorder for them. The girl I spoke with said that she didn't know how long it will take to get to them. I almost wish I hadn't cancelled my Amazon order now.

[/ QUOTE ]

professionalpoker.com Had mine shipped priority mail and had it in 2 days.

[phydaux]

ConJelCo had mine to me the Monday after it came out.

[JohnG]

[ QUOTE ]
To clarify, were you mid-stakes pros already trying to manipulate the pot so that the ratios (smallest stack to pre-flop pot size) were in the range you wanted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't speak for anyone else, but it's always been one of the competing factors I consider in weighing up the play of a hand.

Any hand I find difficult at the table is usually related to the ratios involved. My post play analysis will examine other approaches relating to ratios to see if I can fix the problem there. i.e. I had trouble with AJ in the SB v BB one time on some stack size, and the solution was to alter the post flop ratios by either limping preflop or if I did raise, betting more on the flop than I actually bet at the time. Of course, if I was concentrating better, I would have spotted it at the time.

[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]
I just finished reading the book. I think this book gives a pretty decent recipe for playing soft live games (e.g. bet an amount preflop so that the flop is easier to play,etc). The book's advice imho is terrible for the tough online games. I already read through this and have thought of at least 3 ways you can find out within a couple thousand hands who is trying to implement this and what to do to exploit it (no i won't say how because it is very easy to do if you read the book.)

The book complete ignores the fact that in the tough online games and I am not talking 1/2 or 2/4, the games are so aggro and the players are such good hand readers that people just won't put their stack in against a player who all he does is smash the pot bottom because his SPR told him to commit to his to pair or overpair hand.

I think the author assumes you are playing against a bunch of donkeys. Because a good player will adjust quickly agains this strategy and just not pay you off enough. No matter what SPR you achieve.

I don't find the book horrible but I think it gives a fake sense of security to those who want a quick cookbook recipe to beat poker.

[/ QUOTE ]


Hi tightymcfish,

Thanks for the comments. Couple things....

First off, the book isn't designed to teach players to beat tough aggro high-limit shorthanded online NL games. Tough games are "tough" for a reason, and certainly one needs experience and excellent hand reading skills that are hard to teach in any sort of "cookbook" fashion.

Secondly, I still think most of the concepts in the book are pertinent to any NL game, and could be easily adjusted to even a tough game. No doubt - it would not be as simple as saying "okay I'll just do this everytime and commit everytime." But thinking about Range of hands, Equity, and Maximizing is apt in almost any situation, and is a helpful tool to analyze how to go about reading hands and making the most +EV plays. Thinking about commitment and the idea of the relationship between pot size and remaining stack sizes is extremely helpful - even against tough players.

In fact, one thing you said that I particularly disagree with is this:

[ QUOTE ]
a good player will adjust quickly agains this strategy and just not pay you off enough. No matter what SPR you achieve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certain players at even the high levels have realized that there indeed is a way to play ABC poker without having to be expert hand readers - THEY BUY IN SHORT. Do you think it's a coincidence that so many good high-stakes players absolutely abhor good short-stack players?

The fact is this: many of the excellent, "toughest" players with their laser sharp hand reading skills are completely neutralized by good short-buy players. Despite their impeccable postflop maneuvering, many of these awesome players are often simply playing too loose with not enough preflop equity against a tight range, and have no implied odds to make hand reading skills relevant on the turn or river (because there is no turn or river). And, in fact, they DO end up "paying them off". The shorty is essentially choosing his stack size (as opposed to raise size) to create low SPR's and commit with strong hands.

Again, I totally see where you're coming from, and even appreciate the constructive criticism. I just disagree with the way you're melding concept and practice.

Thanks,

Sunny