Whats their problem?

[FineVol]

I have about two friends that play tourneys with me and they are solid not great. I own many poker books but read Davids the most. I offer them my books but they wont read them. They say I already know how to play good enough. BS There are so many suddle ways to play againts different skilled players and if you dont read you will lose a large edge. Does anyone think a non educated poker player could be better off then an educated one? They are serious about poker so I guess I should let them drown in there own ignorance. <font color="orange">

[Quanah Parker]

Good question. I've got friends a lot like yours.
My best guess is an aversion to reading, but one of my friends reads while he's playing, and yet, he won't read poker books.

None the less, I think there might be a real market for poker books on CD as read by James Earl Jones.

[Diana Ross Fan]

If they are playing with you, count your blessings.

[Frond]

Good post.

Out of the many friends that I have that play in our various home games, only myself and one other friend of mine have read any books. The pals I have that have never read a single book or article on poker are for the most part willing to gamble it up and make lots of calls. Me and my friend who study the game are very consistent medium winners. The others go up and down in big swings. They do win at times and it can be a large amount but more often than not they lose and fairly big amounts. When me and my studious friend lose it is very minimal amounts.

[swingdoc]

FWIW, obviously a "non-educated" poker player can be better than an "educated" one. All studying does is get you to a better skill set faster (or probably with fewer total hands played). Where do you think all these great books came from? Non-educated poker players, duh. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Or do you think Doyle has super secret ancient texts that he learned from?

[phantom_lord]

they're lazy/

and lol at "They say I already know how to play good enough."

[lucky_mf]

Am I the only one who thinks most poker books are useless?

The only one I got anything out of was Super System and the only reason I got anything out of it is because I knew nothing. Doyle wrote about how he played different hands before and after the flop and, in so doing, provided a template for playing that could be moderately successful (at the time at least). It provided some structure for a beginning player. Most of the other books just reiterate the obvious using fancy poker language, and more recently equations (NLHETAP for instance).

Lucky

[omaha]

Gotta learn to walk before you can crawl, and gotta learn to run b4 you can crawl.

The above statement is about as true as your friends who 'dont need to read any poker books'

Yes, there are a few people who have probably stumbled into a winning scenario after realising and picking up feel.

But, i think you need solid templates first.

Just the bare facts of, you need a better hand to call, than to bet, and a stronger one still with players to act. And, that you need a stronger hand to overcall, than to call, will send your bankroll heading north when you understand AND apply it.

[TimWillTell]

[ QUOTE ]
Good question. I've got friends a lot like yours.
My best guess is an aversion to reading, but one of my friends reads while he's playing, and yet, he won't read poker books.


None the less, I think there might be a real market for poker books on CD as read by James Earl Jones.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Your feeeeelings betray you!"

[kolotoure]

[ QUOTE ]

Am I the only one who thinks most poker books are useless?



[/ QUOTE ]

Yes