New 2+2 Small Stakes Hold'em book review

[natroyal]

I just finished reading the new book on Small Stakes Hold'em by Miller/Sklansky/Malmuth. Before, I used the "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" book by Lee Jones as a guide because of its simplcity. However, I always thought there was something missing as I was not taking the money out of the game that I thought I should.

Frankly, I think the strongest section of this book is with the pre-flop recommendations. Particularly the parts of playing pocket pairs. However, I think the book expects too much out of the small stakes players and its opponents by discussing topics that are more fine tuning than broad based in the postflop sections. You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book, and even so these moves will often not work in a game where the best hand wins 80-90% of the time. This is not to say that the book did not enlighten me and change some of my viewpoints, but overall it was a tad disappointing.

What are your thoughts?

Nat

[slogger]

I disagree. The postflop ideas in this book are what makes it great. FWIW, I do think SSHE has improved my preflop play quite a bit (allowing me to take advantage of more situations against my looser, more passive opponents). But it is on the flop and beyond that this book can really improve the reader's game.

The chapters on counting outs and protecting your hand are invaluable. I agree that certain concepts in the book are difficult to grasp at first. But that is why I intend to re-read the book (particularly certain sections) multiple times and try to develop a greater practical understanding of the material.

No book or strategy guide will make the reader better simply by having been read. You've got to immerse yourself in the concepts that confuse you and attempt to see for yourself why they are profitable. As in all things, it is the active study of the more advanced concepts that will separate the wannabe SSHE experts from the truly enlightened sharks.

If you really want to get more out of your games, I suggest you give the postflop sections another chance.

[cold_cash]

I think the post-flop sections are by far the most valuable, and I ain't no genius.

[Jonny Melon]

I personally have found the hand quizzes immensely helpful. I'd love to have a book of "Limit Hold 'em Quizzes and Answers" (Hint Hint to Ed Miller). Seeing the thought processes in very real-life hand situations really crystallized some significant errors I've made in the past.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

[ QUOTE ]
I You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book...

[/ QUOTE ]

Fortunately for me, I am. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[sweetjazz]

The postflop section doesn't discuss any "moves" which involve expecting loose passive small stakes players to fold. Instead, the plays are designed to turn their postflop calls from postive expectation to negative expectation (e.g. they are often right to call 1, but not 2, bets with a flopped gutshow draw). You profit when they make bad decisions. The book is designed to help you use your knowledge of their bad play to choose the play that optimizes your expectation.

If I had a criticism of the book, it is that it does not discuss enough situations involving loose aggressive players. They seem to be more common these days, and the really overaggressive ones can be very profitable (with higher variance as well though). It's important to realize that some flops you might fold when bet at by a loose passive unimaginative player might merit a raise when the bet is from a LAG.

Overall, however, the book offers very good advice, and is designed around how actual small stakes fish play. The postflop discussion does include "moves" so much as ways to make decisions that will lead to optimal expectation. That difference is crucial, and is well explained in the introductory chapter.

[Garbonzo]

I think the Book is brilliant, and pretty damn close to the most useful poker book I have ever read. When I finish it, (i'm in the quizzes) I will go straight to page 1 and start again, and then likely a third time.

The more people that find this book useless and hard to comprehend the better. I find it straight forward and digestable, and it has had IMMEDIATE positve results on my game...

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
I just finished reading the new book on Small Stakes Hold'em by Miller/Sklansky/Malmuth. Before, I used the "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" book by Lee Jones as a guide because of its simplcity. However, I always thought there was something missing as I was not taking the money out of the game that I thought I should.

Frankly, I think the strongest section of this book is with the pre-flop recommendations. Particularly the parts of playing pocket pairs. However, I think the book expects too much out of the small stakes players and its opponents by discussing topics that are more fine tuning than broad based in the postflop sections. You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book, and even so these moves will often not work in a game where the best hand wins 80-90% of the time. This is not to say that the book did not enlighten me and change some of my viewpoints, but overall it was a tad disappointing.

What are your thoughts?

Nat

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you need to read the book again.

[Avatar]

Natroyal if you are new to poker or 2+2 tactics, this book can be intimidating and complicated.
However, for many of us who have been studying this game in depth for months and years, this book is an easy read and the contents, I found to be quite spot on. If absorbed, it truely can take a break even player, to a winning player, unlike many books are able to do.

[MaxPower]

You will never know if the plays suggested in the book work unless you try them.

I think you got the wrong message from the book. The point is that as long as you play tight and avoid big pre-flop mistakes, pre-flop play is not very important. You should focus on your post-flop skills to increase your win rate.

Years ago when I used to lurk on the Small Stakes Forum, I thought that there was some very bad advice given out. Now, I think there is some very good advice. The advice didn't change, I did.

[natroyal]

I am not new to playing smaller stakes Hold'em. I do plan on re-reading the book just as the authors recommend, so what I commented on was my first impression.

From what I have been reading, I will give this book a second read sooner than later. For the record, I liked the postflop section on playing overcards the best. That is a very difficult thing to do properly in a low-limit game (at least for me).

You would have to agree with me that there are VERY few people able to keep track of their opponents' tendencies, the money in the pot, all of the concepts relating to pot odds, keeping track of all kind of outs, etc, etc. etc. Maybe all of you are those people, but I know that I will never be able to absorb ALL of this in the bright lights and distractions that a casino holds. That does not mean that I cannot/have not made money playing, I just will not make as much.

Thanks for all of your input. It is greatly appreciated.

Nat

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I just finished reading the new book on Small Stakes Hold'em by Miller/Sklansky/Malmuth. Before, I used the "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" book by Lee Jones as a guide because of its simplcity. However, I always thought there was something missing as I was not taking the money out of the game that I thought I should.

Frankly, I think the strongest section of this book is with the pre-flop recommendations. Particularly the parts of playing pocket pairs. However, I think the book expects too much out of the small stakes players and its opponents by discussing topics that are more fine tuning than broad based in the postflop sections. You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book, and even so these moves will often not work in a game where the best hand wins 80-90% of the time. This is not to say that the book did not enlighten me and change some of my viewpoints, but overall it was a tad disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Those who criticize this review have missed the point.

There was a point in my development where, had this book been available, I would have read it and could have written this same review. The preflop discussion would have educated me and immediately elevated my EV by a lot. I would also have gained value from some of the postflop sections. The rest would have been interesting but ... I wasn't truly ready for them.

Nat, take what you can out of this book and then put it away. Keep playing and studying and come back later. There is a whole other side of this book that will be waiting for you when you are ready.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]

You would have to agree with me that there are VERY few people able to keep track of their opponents' tendencies, the money in the pot, all of the concepts relating to pot odds, keeping track of all kind of outs, etc, etc. etc. Maybe all of you are those people, but I know that I will never be able to absorb ALL of this in the bright lights and distractions that a casino holds. That does not mean that I cannot/have not made money playing, I just will not make as much.


[/ QUOTE ]

For a beginner it is too much to ask, but its not hard to do all these things once you have thousands of hours of experience under your belt. No book can substitute for experience.

The 2+2 book are only really valuable if you re-read them periodically as your experience increases. People who read them once won't get much from them.

[bernie]

I agree with stellarwind's reply below.

[ QUOTE ]
You would have to agree with me that there are VERY few people able to keep track of their opponents' tendencies, the money in the pot, all of the concepts relating to pot odds, keeping track of all kind of outs, etc, etc. etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bull. I would agree that there are VERY few people really willing to put in the time to be able to keep track of their opponents' tendencies, the money in the pot, all of the concepts relating to pot odds, keeping track of all kind of outs, etc, etc. etc.

Yes, it does take a little effort. If you're not 'new' to the game, this post would be much different. No offense, but it doesn't seem like you really have that much experience in the game.

Question...Without the above 'skills' mentioned(quoted), what did you base your game around? What did you ever pay attention to when playing? Anything? Or did you just sit and wait for the deck to hit you?

Based on your post saying the preflop section was the best, im guessing that you played too loose so that section gave you the most immediate noticeable gain. Which is a good place to start. The real meat by far, playwise, is the postflop sections.

[ QUOTE ]
You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book, and even so these moves will often not work in a game where the best hand wins 80-90% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you don't. You just have to put in more effort than a single read and really study it. Most of us did. Still are.

b

[me454555]

The post flop recommendations in this book aren't so radically different from Lee Jones' book. The real genius of this book lies in the post flop material.

Counting outs and protecting hands is even more important in looser low limit games b/c the pots are larger and multiway. There is a greater need to protect you're hand and greater penalty for folding in a bigger pot.

Try playing online a little bit so you have 1 less thing to concentrate on (counting the pot). After you've played a couple thousand hands, you won't even think about it anymore.

I'm not a huge live game player and often have trouble keeping up w/the size of the pot but after so many thousands of online hands, I don't have to be exact to know when to make a call or not.

[Guy McSucker]

When you do re-read it, do so with this in mind (sweetjazz's excellent reply):
[ QUOTE ]

The postflop section doesn't discuss any "moves" which involve expecting loose passive small stakes players to fold. Instead, the plays are designed to turn their postflop calls from postive expectation to negative expectation (e.g. they are often right to call 1, but not 2, bets with a flopped gutshow draw).


[/ QUOTE ]

As for this:
[ QUOTE ]

You would have to agree with me that there are VERY few people able to keep track of their opponents' tendencies, the money in the pot, all of the concepts relating to pot odds, keeping track of all kind of outs, etc, etc. etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

Very few capable? No. Very few who do it? Absolutely agreed.

The plain fact is that if you want to win more than just a little bit, which is what this book is aiming to show you how to do, you're going to have to start paying at least some attention to all that stuff.

Guy.

[MicroBob]

i am hardly a genius but i think the material is presented in an incredibly easy and straight-forward manner.


the pre-flop material in the book is a decent guide but really isn't a big deal at all.

[stir]

Agree. He needs to read it again.. and then again. As most of us are not geniuses (or not even double major MIT grads), it will take time, effort, several readings and study to well grasp the most important concepts

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just finished reading the new book on Small Stakes Hold'em by Miller/Sklansky/Malmuth. Before, I used the "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" book by Lee Jones as a guide because of its simplcity. However, I always thought there was something missing as I was not taking the money out of the game that I thought I should.

Frankly, I think the strongest section of this book is with the pre-flop recommendations. Particularly the parts of playing pocket pairs. However, I think the book expects too much out of the small stakes players and its opponents by discussing topics that are more fine tuning than broad based in the postflop sections. You have to be a genius to utilize all of the topics mentioned in this book, and even so these moves will often not work in a game where the best hand wins 80-90% of the time. This is not to say that the book did not enlighten me and change some of my viewpoints, but overall it was a tad disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Those who criticize this review have missed the point.

There was a point in my development where, had this book been available, I would have read it and could have written this same review. The preflop discussion would have educated me and immediately elevated my EV by a lot. I would also have gained value from some of the postflop sections. The rest would have been interesting but ... I wasn't truly ready for them.

Nat, take what you can out of this book and then put it away. Keep playing and studying and come back later. There is a whole other side of this book that will be waiting for you when you are ready.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been playing poker for less than 6 months. I am NOT a genius. The book is very straightforward.