My throughts of Phil Gordans DVD and Little green book.

Raiseren1 · #1 07-14-2006, 03:25 PM

SO I have read the book and watched the DVD.

I found that the book had a lot of usefull stuff, and I think that this is the first book I have read where the author describes so detailed how he players. THat is very good I think, and I like the way he uses percentages to describe how often he checks / bets e.g.

But compared to NL TP I think the Little green book only covers a lot of basic thing. That book is more a collection of alot of poker littature and there was no subject in the book where I said, WOW, that was really interesting, or that was a good point. He also said that in the end that this book wasn't suppossed to be a math book, but I really think that he had to make some EV calculations to proof that some of the play he made was correct. I generally agree with the way he plays, but he doesn't argue a lot why that is the best way to play.

Generally I think this books target group is those who have played the game for a few months and know the basic stuff like Pot odds and implied odds. I have only played poker for about 10 months and even though I have studied the game very intensly I throught that Phil Gordan could learn me more.

The Final table DVD was made very professional, but really... It's just a short report of the book. Also I never actually had problem at guessing why players acted like they did on television (WPT/WSOP). So the target group wasn't me. But I bought it because a lot of people at this forum had said good thinks about it. The only usefull things about this DVD was the thing about tells. That was very good explained I think.

ECDub · #2 07-14-2006, 04:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He also said that in the end that this book wasn't suppossed to be a math book, but I really think that he had to make some EV calculations to proof that some of the play he made was correct. I generally agree with the way he plays, but he doesn't argue a lot why that is the best way to play.

[/ QUOTE ]

My impression of the book was that Gordon mentions early in the book he is specifically letting the reader know how he plays. I'm not sure it was meant to be a book on how best to play, so there was no need for him to argue his point.

I believe he mentions he is not the best player, but he is a winning player and this is how he plays for the most part. He says if you disagree with what he says, that is good. LGB was not intended to be a definitive guide on the game. He wrote the book to allow readers to see how a winning professional plays.

Raiseren1 · #3 07-14-2006, 05:36 PM

ECdub. Yes I know that. What is your point by writing that?

Rob-L · #4 07-16-2006, 01:13 AM

Because you said Phil doesn't argue why his way is the best way to play.

ECDub is pointing out that there is no reason for PG to argue that since he is not claiming to know the best way to play or to be the best player.

LordBaldrick · #5 07-16-2006, 02:35 AM

May I suggest that you edit your writing at 5.25pm rather than 5.25am! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Raiseren1 · #6 07-16-2006, 04:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Because you said Phil doesn't argue why his way is the best way to play.

ECDub is pointing out that there is no reason for PG to argue that since he is not claiming to know the best way to play or to be the best player.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not a reason for not argue why you think that is the best way to play, even though you admit that it isn't necessarily the best way to play it.

[ QUOTE ]
May I suggest that you edit your writing at 5.25pm rather than 5.25am! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not know if you have noticed it, but US isn't the whole world.

TimsterToo · #7 07-16-2006, 06:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
May I suggest that you edit your writing at 5.25pm rather than 5.25am! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's on my side of the pond so he edited it at 10.25am. Still ridiculously (sp?) early to be awake though! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

LordBaldrick · #8 07-17-2006, 06:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
May I suggest that you edit your writing at 5.25pm rather than 5.25am! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not know if you have noticed it, but US isn't the whole world.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, I think you missed the point. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

TimsterToo · #9 07-17-2006, 06:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
May I suggest that you edit your writing at 5.25pm rather than 5.25am! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not know if you have noticed it, but US isn't the whole world.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, I think you missed the point. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe so but I think you missed his, see my post right above yours. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

ECDub · #10 07-17-2006, 08:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I found that the book had a lot of usefull stuff, and I think that this is the first book I have read where the author describes so detailed how he players.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
That book is more a collection of alot of poker littature and there was no subject in the book where I said, WOW, that was really interesting, or that was a good point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone else confused by the review? It was tough to decipher. Early in the review it is stated that Gordon did a great job describing how he plays personally and it helped the reviewer a lot. Then in the next paragraph, the book has suddenly became a collection of information from other poker literature and the information was of little or no interest.

I guess since he mentions it was geared to players with a few months experience and he has only played ten months, it was a perfect book for him. He also agrees with the way Gordon plays, so I guess there were no complaints on the content.