Professional No-Limit Hold 'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]
"we ran out of room. Sunny wrote that discussion long before volume 1 was submitted, but it wouldn't fit."


How do you run out of ROOM when making a book?

Are there conscious marketing or financial reason to say "This book can only be X pages long at this price and we can't go over this price"?

(I know that sounds obvious, but I'm a little curious about the logistics of creating a book and the decisions involved)

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Larry,

"Ran out of room" is shorthand for: we had so much more material that we decided to write another volume. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] And at that point it became important to decide how to organizationally end one volume and begin another. So it's not necessarily just that that specific topic "didn't fit" space-wise, but also "didn't fit" with our chosen organization of the book.


-S

[dardo]

I've just finished reading the book. It's very well written so thank you to Ed for his editing skills.

About the content I found it very basic, but nice to read and go over things you already knew getting more consistent in your knowledge. Picking something here and there, and getting some inspiration to get to a more creative game.

It's also nice to find things you had already discovered confirmed by people you know are very good players.

I'm looking for the 2nd (and other volumes if they come).

[Sunny Mehta]

guys,

SPR is indeed a "concept". It's a tool to help you bridge the relationship between preflop actions and postflop actions. We will spend a lot more specifically on postflop in Volume Two, but we still made clear several things in V.1 that some of you seem to be glossing over.

First off, your Max and Target SPRs are based heavily on how your opponent plays - that's key. You are OFTEN gonna want different SPRs against fish than you are against good players.

Secondly, we mention throughout the text that commitment is a conditional decision. How and whether you commit can change drastically depending on things like not only your SPR, but the next card, or HOW THE MONEY GOES IN POSTFLOP - i.e. - the line you and your opponents take. The latter thing is especially important against better players. You might fold a hand if you go bet-bet and your opponent raises the turn, and commit with the same hand against the same opponent if the action goes check-bet or some other variation in postflop line.

Nowhere do we state that the "point" of SPR is so that you can go pot-pot-pot or always jam all-in on the flop or whatever other nonsense. We state throughout the chapter that the "point" of SPR is TO MAKE POSTFLOP PLAY EASIER. Which it absolutely does.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

-S

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One of the nice things about SPR is if you build your target SPR, hit your hand, and commit, who cares if they flopped a set or 2 pair or a flush draw that comes in on the turn, etc. . .

You did your job. You expect to make money most of the time when you build your target SPR and hit the hand you were trying to make. But you also expect that they will outflop you sometimes and outdraw you others.

So, when they do, it's easier to swallow. In other words, you reduce the tilt factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the kind of thinking I'm a little hesitant to adopt after reading this book. I'm still not quite finished...I actually started over on the SPR section... so haven't got to the adjustments part yet.

It seems like you're saying, if you build your target SPR and decide you're going to commit, then don't lay your hand down ever. Or am I mis-reading and you're stating that you're making your commitment decision on the flop (not before)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not saying NEVER fold when you hit your target SPR, hit your hand, and commit to the pot.

But you should RARELY fold at your target SPRs after 1/3rd of your stack goes in and you have top pair, good kicker or an overpair. Especially if you are playing a medium stack.

The book details some examples of when you might reconsider your commitment to the pot. Certainly, REM comes into play. Range, of course, is highly dependent on what type of foe you are facing.

But for example, last night I was playing 5-10 PL with a player I had never seen. He has ~500 and limps in. I have 575 with AQ, and raise it to 50 (can bring it in for 50 any time). Everyone folds to him, and he calls. 110 in the pot after rake. Flop comes Q rag rag. He checks. I bet 85. He thinks a bit, and reraises the pot.

Would you fold there? I didn't. I put him all in, and he turned over JJ. He was married to a pocket pair - just betting "the don't" on the Q or an overpair.

[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]


I am not saying NEVER fold when you hit your target SPR, hit your hand, and commit to the pot.

But you should RARELY fold at your target SPRs after 1/3rd of your stack goes in and you have top pair, good kicker or an overpair.

The book details some examples of when you might reconsider your commitment to the pot. Certainly, REM comes into play. Range, of course, is highly dependent on what type of foe you are facing.

But for example, last night I was playing 5-10 PL with a player I had never seen. He has ~500 and limps in. I have 575 with AQ, and raise it to 50 (can bring it in for 50 any time). Everyone folds to him, and he calls. 110 in the pot after rake. Flop comes Q rag rag. He checks. I bet 85. He thinks a bit, and reraises the pot.

Would you fold there? I didn't. I put him all in, and he turned over JJ. He was married to a pocket pair - just betting "the don't" on the Q or an overpair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Binions,

Nice hand - I will use it as an example for others in the thread.

You guys can see that in this hand Binions decided preflop that, even though he'd never played with this particular opponent, based on the general game conditions he is comfortable creating a stack-to-pot ratio of ~4.5 with a hand like AQ and committing with TPTK. Also, he feels that one acceptable way to commit against a random opponent in this game is to just bet out.

He expects to be ahead of his opponents' range when he commits, and he expects to make money. In addition, because he's already thought this out, his decision in the moment becomes less nerve-racking.

YOU adjust the specifics to YOUR game. You might decide that 4.5 is too much money to put into the pot with AQ in your game because the players play very tight to preflop raises and are tight postflop when facing bets. You decide that you are only willing to put in 3 times the pot with AQ after raising preflop. You might then decide that that's almost impossible with your ideal stack size, so instead you decide to play a much smaller pot (say SPR of 17) where your commitment decision won't come until later in the hand when you have more information.

However, you might then decide that, actually, 4.5 is not too much to commit to if you let THEM do the betting, or if you check-call the flop, or bet the flop and lead the turn, or min-raise preflop, etc. etc.

And you might do the same type of thing with other hands, like say, 76s. You may decide to do x preflop with the intention of doing y postflop such that you maximize profits - whether that means stealing the pot, making the best hand and having good implied odds, etc.

The point is that you start thinking through the hand as a whole, and plan ahead, rather than viewing each individual action as some sort of independent and often excruciating decision.

-S

[JackCase]

End of thread. Nothing more needs to be said after Tommy Angelo's review on Amazon:

[ QUOTE ]
This book is to no-limit hold'em what Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" was to zoology. There has been a permanent, dramatic, and final enhancement of understanding. Kudos to Flynn, Mehta, and Miller for this profound achievement.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ryanj247]

[ QUOTE ]


It seems like you're saying, if you build your target SPR and decide you're going to commit, then don't lay your hand down ever. Or am I mis-reading and you're stating that you're making your commitment decision on the flop (not before)?

[/ QUOTE ]

one way to think about it is like this:

suppose you have AQ, the flop is QT7, and you bet $7 into a $10 pot. your opponent raises all-in. if he's short, and you have to call only $5 more, you obviously call every time. if you're both deep and you have to call $200, it's a clear fold against most opponents. somewhere in between is the point where, after you make that $7 bet, you're never going to fold for $x more.

the blinds were $.50/$1, you raised $4.5 preflop, your opponent called in the SB, and so the pot was $10 on the flop. if he started the hand with $24.5, the SPR would be 2. after your $7 bet, you would have to call $13 more if he CRAI. against decent opponents, an SPR of 2 is ideal with big top pair hands. once you make a big bet on the flop, you're never folding.

if the opponent was a typical bad player who overvalues his hands, your $4.5 raise would create an ideal situation when his starting stack was $49.5 (SPR = 4.5). vs these types of opponents, when you bet $7, you'll call $38 more without hesitation.

and against a terrible, reckless opponent, you wouldn't mind if his starting stack were $74.5 (SPR = 7). when he CRAI, you'll happily put in another $63 with TPTK.

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One of the nice things about SPR is if you build your target SPR, hit your hand, and commit, who cares if they flopped a set or 2 pair or a flush draw that comes in on the turn, etc. . .

You did your job. You expect to make money most of the time when you build your target SPR and hit the hand you were trying to make. But you also expect that they will outflop you sometimes and outdraw you others.

So, when they do, it's easier to swallow. In other words, you reduce the tilt factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the kind of thinking I'm a little hesitant to adopt after reading this book. I'm still not quite finished...I actually started over on the SPR section... so haven't got to the adjustments part yet.

It seems like you're saying, if you build your target SPR and decide you're going to commit, then don't lay your hand down ever.

[/ QUOTE ]


ah, yeah, that would be a pretty big flaw. no, not saying that at all. you can sometimes improve to a better decision. SPR merely provides a global sanity check (Ed's words): is getting all-in reasonable here? can i set up a good situation for my hand?

once you make the preflop assessment and the hand plays out, you then have the option to improve. before any commitment decision, we advocate stepping back and deciding whether it's a good one. so if your opponent pops you hard on the turn, even if SPR says it's profitable to get all-in (from a preflop perspective), you should step back and ask "what's his range NOW?" is my hand still profitable against that range given all the dead money in the pot? if not you muck.

cliff notes: SPR is a guideline for managing effective odds from a preflop perspective. when new information comes in, you should still use it. sometimes that means fold even if you are near your target SPR.

cliff notes on cliff notes: sometimes when a plan meets the battlefield, it dies.

(btw thanks for posting this 7n7, really important clarification)

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

Frankly, it sounds like you're the one looking for a cookbook. The authors are giving you concepts to play with. Obviously strong opponents are not going to allow you to do things that make the game easy to play. That's why they're strong opponents. If all opponents in a game are applying optimal strategy and theory, then it approaches an irresistable force/immovable object scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

No sir I do not want a cookbook because there is none and never will be. They are not giving concepts sir, NLTHP gave concepts this book gives concrete examples that show that if you bet x all you have to do is pot, pot ,pot and you will get the money.

This maybe be true against the weak live fish but this does not hold true for the tougher online games 5/10 and up. Maybe even 3/6. Players will adjust to your hand ranges and pot pot pot will be giving them money or not getting payed at all. That is my only issue with the book nothing else. I think the information is very good against the fish but not that great against the better regs in today's games.
And if you couldn't beat the fish already without this book well then....

[/ QUOTE ]


hi tighty,

i think i understand you better now. i feel we don't disagree nearly as much as has been presented in this thread. yes, reality is SPR is only so helpful and is not sufficient to make someone a winner in a tough game. you still gotta play poker and get good at hand reading.

the idea that SPR sets it all up and then it's easy is NOT in PNL and is not mine or Sunny's or Ed's. _easier_ yes. easy no.

SPR helps you manage effective odds in your favor and to a lesser extent helps you avoid situations that are bad for you but good for opponents who have position or hands of a different class or both. that's it.

you still have to adapt to new information and changes in estimated ranges. "i did this, so my opponent will put me on this range." "He raised the flop, so my estimation of his range changes to this." then you put all that together to reevaluate. SPR provides the sanity check. then you go play poker.

overall, SPR still applies in any game. but as postflop information increases in importance and as skilled aggression increases, the game becomes far harder and cannot be played cookie-cutter, even when that cookie cutter supposedly is SPR. however, it still helps to know when the hard play will come in, and when you should just grit your teeth and get all-in even if the decision seems tough.

in nosebleed hu games, for example, it often becomes correct to get all in with weak top pair after a hand plays out a certain way. but you cannot always get all-in there: you'll get killed. so you must learn to hand read well and feel the flow of your opponent's play to succeed. you must know when to get all-in with a weak hand and when to let it go. SPR can help a little, but the adjustment to postflop information becomes so extreme that ANY preflop technique (save for shortstacking) must necessarily be limited in value.

let me repeat this publicly right now: SPR is NOT sufficient to overcome tough games with medium stacks. you still gotta hand read and play poker.

tighty does that response address your issues? fine if we still disagree but your concerns are well stated and i wanted to respond to all of them.

matt

[phydaux]

[ QUOTE ]
End of thread. Nothing more needs to be said after Tommy Angelo's review on Amazon:

[ QUOTE ]
This book is to no-limit hold'em what Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" was to zoology. There has been a permanent, dramatic, and final enhancement of understanding. Kudos to Flynn, Mehta, and Miller for this profound achievement.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Man. For the two or three dozen people that know who Tommy Angelo is, that's going to mean a great deal.

Wasn't Tommy going to come out with his own NL cash game bood this year?

Probably in the pipe right after Caffione's & Negranio's.

Wow. Angelo, Caffione, Negranio... See what opening up gambling in New Jersey has done?

Ba Da BING!