Tips for reading NLTP

[amulet]

the book is good and has real value. and if you already know the game it can help the non advanced player get to another level. however, it does not teach someone how to play no limit. for that you should read a bunch of books including this one (and the top limit books), and learn over low limit tables. i assume the harrington/robertie book will teach how to play no limit.

[SuitedKingAce]

[ QUOTE ]
for that you should read a bunch of books including this one (and the top limit books), and learn over low limit tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

?

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
If DS & Ed wanted to be useful, they might explain WHY think think it's 60% likely their opponent will fold to a given bet, rather than assuming such a critical and hard to get piece of information and then showing us some arithmetic anyone who did well in 4th grade could set up and do on their own.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree. From that perspective, the book is practically worthless.

Here's a contrived example. Let's say you are bluffing, and can get your opponent to fold TPTK 80% of the time with an all-in bet of 4 times the pot size, 60% of the time with a bet the size of the pot, and 10% of the time with a bet half the size of the pot.

Well, then they show the high school math, like

(.6)(100)-(.4)(100) > (.8)(100)-(.2)(40)) > (.1)(100)-(.9)(50)

and say something like "Some players believe if you bluff, you should pick the amount that gets your opponent to fold the most often. But as you can see, you should make the play that maximizes your expectation, not the play that gets him to fold most often." (As if that's earth shattering.)

So basically we've just wasted 15 minutes reading a section that tells us "maximize your expectation", but doesn't tell us how to play poker.

As you can see, while it's called "Theory and Practice", there's very little "practice" involved. And sometimes the "theory" ain't exactly the shiznit either.

[amulet]

what part don't you understand?

limit books are currently better then the nl limit books and a player needs to understand odds, hand values, number of outs, etc. i think hpfap, top, getting the best of it, itpm, etc., all give anyone who reads them a better understanding of most games, including no limit.

[portisfreak]

Seriously, this is why I think only half of NLTP makes sense. It's helped my game quite a bit, but so much of it is incredibly subjective (If you THINK your opponent will call 70% of the time, then your EV is x) it's ridiculous. This is also probably why I stopped playing NL HE online outside of tournaments. I have no clue with 90% of my opponents. Someone should really should write a book on No Limit Psychology, something a bit more useful.

[amulet]

a good player has a much greater advantage in nl then any otherr game. but if someone needs a book to learn how to play, then they need to read most of the top poker books available, and spend time over the tables. it can be done.

[Oct0puz]

Seriously, do all of you really believe that David and Ed expects you to think like "There's a 30% chance that he will bet if I check" and so on. Lots of this numbers in the book are there just to "proof" the concepts and make the explanation of them much easier.

[Aceshigh7]

I like the book very much. I didn't expect to because the authors were known primarily as limit players. But the book is quite good.

[springb0ks]

[ QUOTE ]
As I said, you're free to be wrong. Have fun with that [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

I've shared plenty of strategy advice on this forum, and will continue to do so, but that really has little to do with my position on NLH:TAP and nothing to do with Ed and DS's faults as NL players.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be honest, Splawn i do think you have a point. However i do respect Sklansky's books, as he is no doubt a better player than me either way, so i am happy to learn from his books.

However i agree with you on the aspect that i would rather learn from someone who has proved themselves at ultra-high stakes NL holdem, such as Phil Ivey.

Peace

[Splossy]

From an inexperienced players POV this is my least favorite NL book. I love reading poker books almost as much as my wife hates me reading them, which is a lot. But every time I open this one I find I get confused, bored or the overwhelming desire to say "yes - so what?"

jeffnc's post is uncannily accurate as far as I'm concerned. Harrington's books on the other hand are interesting, informative and have had a positive effect on my game. Maybe i'm not ready for NLHTAP or maybe it's not written very well. I dunno yet.