Review: Poker Strategy, Proven Priciples... A.D. Livingston

[feint06]

Poker Strategy, Proven Principles for Winning Play
A.D. Livingston
Copyright 1991 (originally published in 1971)
List Price: $14.95 USD
209 pages


Summary:

Poker Strategy tries to be a complete poker guide for the 1970s. It includes how to conduct your own poker game, managing your bankroll, basic bluffing, observing and analyzing your opponents, playing position, drawing, swinging (in hi/lo declare games), dealing with cheats, math & probabilities, and concludes with a compilation of popular dealer’s choice games including rules and very basic strategy guidelines.



Impressions:

This book is a blast from the past so it may, on occasion, offend those in politically correct ivory towers. The games covered are sometimes obscure, but many strategies are surprisingly modern (Game Theory, Squeeze Play, etc). Livingston’s descriptions of these concepts are often more clear and concise than either Slansky or Harrington. Unfortunately, these short sections don’t make up for other shortcomings when compared to more modern works like Theory of Poker (or HOH). In trying to make a concise poker guide, Livingston doesn’t always go into as much detail as he could – giving each game only a page or two of specific strategy. Still, I found a ton of useful information that might improve my results in lowball, stud, and draw on those Dealer’s Choice nights…

But the true value in Poker Strategy, is more in its historical perspective. I was particularly fascinated with Livingston’s coverage of a hot new game called “Hold Me Darling:”

Each Player received two cards face down. A round of betting followed. Then three communal cards were turned up in the middle. Another bet. Another turn card. Another bet. Final turn card. Final bet. Showdown.



When analyzing a large pot where he lost AK to QQ, he was unsure of his probabilities. No one knew at the time. So broke out the trusty slide rule and determined he had a 44% chance of winning. Unsure of his calculations, he dealt out 1000 hands where AK was against QQ. AK won 467 and tied 6 times…


Using rudimentary calculations like those, Livingston began to devise a basic strategy. Here is an example of 1971 Hold’em analysis:


BB
Pro
Utg+1
Mp1
Mp2
Monkey
Bookie

<font color="blue">Dealt to pro: 7 7</font>
Pro opens for $5, everyone calls.

<font color="blue">Flop: 4 6 7 (pot $35)</font>
Pro bets $35. 3 folds. Monkey and Bookie call.

<font color="blue">Turn: 6 (pot $140)</font>
Pro bets $50. Monkey and Bookie call.

<font color="blue">River: 5 (pot $290)</font>
Pro bets $100. Monkey raised to $200. Bookie calls. Pro raised to $500. Monkey calls. Bookie pushes all-in for ???. Monkey calls.

Bookie shows 66 (four of a kind, sixes)
Monkey shows ?? (straight no good)

Being the dealer, the bookie had the best possible position at the table because he was last to act on his hand. If he had held two high cards, in this ideal position, he would have raised before the turn (2007 edit: flop). Moreover, the bookie would not have called the opening bet with a big card and a little card, unless they happened to be an ace-pip (2007 edit: Ace-rag) in suit. Chances were, then, that the bookie held either a small pair or two small straight cards. The betting sequence, and especially the tap (2007 edit: all-in), indicated a pair of 6’s down. Of utmost importance was the pro’s knowledge of the bookie’s character. If the bookie had been another monkey, the pro would probably have called the tap. But the bookie was cagey enough to sandbag. He was cautious and would not have tapped without holding a lock. He was intelligent, and no doubt he had subjected the pro’s hand to analysis; before deciding to sandbag during the last betting interval, he had to have put the pro on a full house.

How did the pro know that the bookie wasn’t bluffing? That was the easiest part of the analysis. The bookie might conceivably have bluffed against the pro or another good player, but never against the monkey. The bookie knew that the monkey would call, and the pro knew that he knew it.

Livingston’s basic strategy for hold’em was to flop-it-or-drop-it in an 8+ handed game playing any pairs, suited cards, or broadway cards into unraised pots and to be mindful of weak kickers.

There is a nice section on cheating, where Livingston outlines some ways to spot a cheating dealer as well as number of ways cards can be marked (sunning? LOL). I don't know how current these techniques are, but I was still impressed.


Recommendation: A nice look into the origins of hold’em and adolescent poker strategy. From a strategical point of view, this book is unlikely to help in its intended way. Instead, I think any current strategical advantage would be limited to gaining some insight into the minds of the graybeards at your table…



A note on the 2nd edition: The first edition may hold some value to collectors, but the 2nd edition is essentially the same book. The two main changes were a deletion of recommended books (they were all out of date in 1991) and a new introduction in which Livingston boasts about his prediction of Hold'em taking over. The rest of the text remains unchanged...