How many hours a day do you read Sklansky, Malmuth, Miller,Stox,and Z?

nineinchal · #1 06-25-2007, 04:37 PM

I read them two hours a day, five days a week, riding the subway between Brooklyn and Manhattan, an hour each way. I am about to die of repetition. I even studied it to the point I understand the equations in "Gambling Theory and Other Topics, which is statistical calculus, or whatever level of higher level math they taught us in college when I took (toke) up bonging as a co-major.

I can't believe I am wasting my life this way, even though this has been a very profitable endeavor.

I do this 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year. When will the men in the clean white suits be coming to take me away, ha ha, ho ho, to the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time?????????????????? Take me now Lord, please take me now!!

mike1601 · #2 06-25-2007, 04:39 PM

try playboy

Humble Pie · #3 06-25-2007, 04:46 PM

Why do you have to read poker books that you've already read? Some suggestions, 1.) Expand your horizons. 2.) Expand your horizons, 3.) Don't mess up the screen size when you post.

nineinchal · #4 06-25-2007, 04:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you have to read poker books that you've already read?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because reading more 2+2 stuff adds greatly to my profitability. That is my point here.

I want more feedback from other posters who keep reading and re-reading the twoplustwo books. It is my opinion that the more I read, the more improvement to my game.

Gelford · #5 06-25-2007, 05:16 PM

Dude, you should browse the forums and print out post by high class posters instead of limiting yourself to the narrow libraty that is books

Wilco666 · #6 06-25-2007, 06:03 PM

I spend 1-2 hours a day reading (and re-reading, and re-re-reading) poker books, mostly not for the sake of spending time, but because I learn more and more every time I read them.

phydaux · #7 06-25-2007, 06:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, you should browse the forums and print out post by high class posters instead of limiting yourself to the narrow libraty that is books

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. He seems to imply, from his choice of authors, that he's a limit player. If I were still a limit hold'em specialist, I'd for sure limit myself to 8-10 books, including Real Poker II, Mason's Essays, Stox's new book and a few others.

Since I'm currently a NL cash game specialist, I recently went to cardplayer.com and printed out every Caffione NL article in the database, three-hole-punched them and put them in a 3-ring binder. As good or better than 90% of the NL books out there. And it was free. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Gelford · #8 06-25-2007, 07:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know. He seems to imply, from his choice of authors, that he's a limit player. If I were still a limit hold'em specialist, I'd for sure limit myself to 8-10 books, including Real Poker II, Mason's Essays, Stox's new book and a few others.

Since I'm currently a NL cash game specialist, I recently went to cardplayer.com and printed out every Caffione NL article in the database, three-hole-punched them and put them in a 3-ring binder. As good or better than 90% of the NL books out there. And it was free. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly Phydaux ... I see you give opinions that are simply wierd in my ears. These forums are a gold mine, not only for NL, but also for limit.

Limiting yourself to a few books, many off them from a pre-pokerboom age, where poker was much more weaktight is nonsense (Ciaffone a case in point)

Dude, come ... visit us in uNL and play some six-max with us, share your NL-expertice with us [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

phydaux · #9 06-25-2007, 08:23 PM

Sorry Gel. 6-max gives me a rash. You'll find me in the FR forum, where my Nit Fu makes money.

phydaux · #10 06-25-2007, 09:31 PM

Besides, limit is much more of a card game - Show down the best hand and take the pot. Limit on a loose table is all about getting paid of with your big draws. The stratagies on how to adjust to tight/loose or weak/aggressive tables aren't going to change much, if it's 1997 or 2007.

NL is about reading people and using position & agression to exploit their mistakes. NL has evolved recently, mostly because of the internet and 6-max.

No overhead means internet sites can spread an unlimited number of short handed tables. Action junkies love shorthanded tables because the games are fast & aggressive. Pro players love short handed games because it gives them the largest oportunity to exploit the mistakes of the fish & the action junkies.

I avoid 6-max mostly because it's the regular home of so many good players. I have no desire to play against good players. I'd much rather play with a bunch of chumps. So I play FR.