When Is Sklansky on NL coming out? I need the NL TORAH!

[Gata Kamsky]

When is MR. Sklansky coming out with the bible on NL play? There are no good books out and I can't wait for him to come out with it. Please tell me soon, I will personally pay $1000 for an advance copy.

[betgo]

Sklansky is primarily a limit player.

There is a pretty good book on NL by some guy named Brunson. I heard he is coming out iwith an update on it.

[betgo]

Also Harrington and Raymer are both coming out with books on NL tournament play.

The NL tournament book by McEvoy and Daugherty is good, but not real advanced.

[slickpoppa]

Although Harrington's book is techincally geared towards NL tourneys, the first volume deals with the early stages of tournaments, which are similar to cash game situations. If the book is as good as Mason says, it should be the best NL book written to date (I refuse to compare a poker book to the Torah, Bible, or any religious text).

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Gata Kamsky:

We hope to have it in 6 to 8 months.

Best wishes,
Mason

[betgo]

Have what? Harrington's book or is Sklansky actually writing a NL book?

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Have what? Harrington's book or is Sklansky actually writing a NL book?

[/ QUOTE ]

Word is Sklansky and Miller are writing a NL book. I could be wrong, but I think it was supposed to be a beginner's level book.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi MEbenhoe:

No. It will be much more sophisticated than beginners level.

Best wishes,
Mason

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi MEbenhoe:

No. It will be much more sophisticated than beginners level.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, my mistake, now that I'm thinking of it I believe I was mixing that book up with Ed Miller's beginner's limit book he has spoken about writing.

[betgo]

I find it very unlikely that a book with Sklanky's name on it would include only beginners material.

I am sure the Sklanky book will be excellent, but there already is a Bible/Torah/Koran of no limit poker by Brunson.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi betgo:
I'm just curious, but do you constantly move all-in as Doyle advocates?

Best wishes,
Mason

[greg nice]

ciaffone's NL book *should* be coming out soon. if its anything like PL&NL, itll be great.

[Thythe]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi betgo:
I'm just curious, but do you constantly move all-in as Doyle advocates?

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I find Doyle's advice to be nearly useless these days. I look forward to a book by Sklansky and company in regards to No Limit.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Greg:

I also suspect that Bob's book will be pretty good.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Thyne:

I've been playing some $10-$20 blind no limt at The Bellagio. There's a player, Oneil Longston (I don't know if I spelled his last name correctly) who plays approximately like Doyle describes. (By the way, I don't normally mention other player's names, but I'll make an exception here.) He raises approximately 80 percent of the time before the flop, and likes to bet the flop blind. Needless to say, when I'm in the game with him, I don't hear "Take it Doyle" and he doesn't seem to do very well.

Perhaps 30 years ago, before my time as a poker player, when the material for the original Super/System was written and many players played in a weak tight fashion, this was a viable strategy. But that's not the case today.

You need to understand that no limit hold 'em for practical purposes disappeared approximately 20 years ago. But thanks to poker on TV it got revived about a year ago, and many of the players, some of whom I have never seen before, can't wait to get all their money in. It's a whole different ball game.

Let me tell a little story. About three weeks ago I walked into The Bellagio and sat down in a $5-$10 no limit game because it had a seat open. (This was the only time I've seen this blind structure no limit hold 'em spread.) I bought in for $500 and on the very first hand I played (and I was in the blind) I was dealt a pair of aces. Three people had limped in for $10 and I began to raise. The first two players quickly folded, but the third player said to me "I never fold." So instead of raising to $50 I made it $120. Of course he called, and then he called my all-in bet on the flop. I never saw his hand but he was irritated when he saw my two aces and I took the pot.

Now as bizarre as this story is, there are a bunch of these players in these games. The right way to play against them is a conservative strategy that is looking to trap with a strong hand. That's not what Super/System advocates. It will be interesting to see what kind of strategy Super/System II offers for these cash games.

By the way, correct no limit tournament strategy, especially late in a tournament, can and should be much more aggressive than the cash games.

Best wishes,
Mason

[froggy527]

[ QUOTE ]
It will be interesting to see what kind of strategy Super/System II offers for these cash games.


[/ QUOTE ]

It will be interesting,I remember Doyle saying that
he had to change the way he played after SS came out.

[kagame]

reuben and ciaffone's books are the fo fizzle shizznitch.

dont bother with imitators, theres only one funk master.

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Thyne:
The right way to play against them is a conservative strategy that is looking to trap with a strong hand. That's not what Super/System advocates. It will be interesting to see what kind of strategy Super/System II offers for these cash games.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've found this works extremely well on super-loose internet games. I've seen players who frequently try to push players out with TPTK on the flop get called by several others (even with a decent stack). I've been playing uber-tight (VP$IP~15% at the most) and basically just playing my PPs and nut flush draws agressively.

Freakin

[betgo]

I don't follow Brunson's loose aggressive advice completely nor do I follow Cloutier's weak tight advice.

In tournaments, satellites, and SNGs, I do move in a lot, due to pot odds and folding equity. This tactic is more useful than in cash games.

Brunson's sections in Super System are brilliant and the best information available on playing no limit for cash. The fact that you may find some faults with it does not contradict this. Perhaps Sklansky's book will surpass it.

[kagame]

you are completely wrong. Doyles SS is completely outdated and has been totally assimilated by the poker community to the point where even if you havent read it youre probably aware of its basic tenets. the strategies contained within DO NOT WORK IN TODAYS POKER GAMES. (some small kernels are valuable, such as doyles advice on suited connectors and draws in extremely deep NL holdem, but most people dont play at all deep!)

CIAFFONE CIAFFONE CIAFFONE

Im not gonna tell you why its the best, stop being lazy and read it yourself, its a fundamentally important work(s) and if youre not up on its game style and ideas, youre a friggin dinosaur at the table compared to people who are.

[betgo]

I read Ciafone's book. Somewhat useful, but not that much information. Brunson gives more information on how to play various hands. My play improves whenever I reread it.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi kagame:

I agree with you. Super/System was a great book when it was written, and it should still be read by serious players, but learn how to play from other sources. This is especially true with the no limit section.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi betgo:

I agree that there are some specifics in the no limit section that are very good, but if you use this general style in no limit cash games, which is what it was written for, I don't like your chances.

On the other hand, if you make some adjustments as you indicate and use SS to help you pick up a few other things then that's great. Again, it will be interesting to compare the no limit section in SS2 to the original. (By the way, if it compares well, that could be because they have geared it more towards tournaments than side games. This would make sense since the return of no limit side games is a very recent event.)

Another thought, Harrington on Hold 'em, Expert Strategy for No Limit Tournaments; Volume I: Strategic Play will be available in a few weeks. This is for the early and middle stages of a tournament which in many instances plays similarly to a side game. You will see that Dan advocates a style quite different than what SS advocates.

On the other hand, when Harrington on Hold 'em, Expert Strategy for No Limit Tournaments; Volume II: End Play is available this spring, you will see that it becomes correct to play quite aggressively late in a tournament.

Both of these approaches have something to do with the amount of chips you have relative to the size of the blinds. It's also one of the reasons why the very aggressive tournament players who don't adjust to the side games do poorly in them and vice versa.

Best wishes,
Mason

[betgo]

I don't advocate playing in that general style, although the points about the value of aggressive play are accurate. I also wouldn't always play hands like K2s and 53s as he seems to imply. I think we are agreed that the insight and analysis of the game are valuable.

Cloutier has some valuable information in his book. However, I think his advice is much more questionable. For example, only reraising in tournaments with AA or KK. He also says you should check/fold if you raise with AK, get two calls, and the flop comes AQQ.

[kagame]

Hopefully the new NL book that youre associated with will blast everything else out of the water :-).
That, Ciaffone's new NL book, the Harrington Tournament books, and SS2 all coming out in a short period...
Very exciting time for those of us that utilize poker literature and are excited by big bet poker.
Might even revolutionize the game?

[kagame]

excuse me, RE-revolutionize :-)

[Wayfare]

Mason, have you talked to any of the excellent posters on the ML/HL no limit forums for input? I have learned more from posters like Matt Flynn, El Diablo, limon, ML4L, etc. than I can even begin to explain here.

Also, is ray zee going to contribute?

It is my observation that Mr. Sklansky only asks about limit and tournament questions on this board, and I have never personally seen him talk extensively about no limit. What is his and your experience in no limit, and will your mathematically based evaluation methods that work so well for limit really apply well to no limit?

Will there be a long discussion of game theory and optimal bluffing strategy? I sure hope so.

[johnnybeef]

I'm curious if this is what the gist of harrington and sklansky will be saying. I try to play nl cash games in a similar way that holdem for advanced players recommends playing limit with two key exceptions:

1. i pride myself with having a very keen instinct on when an opponent will let go of a hand and i will make that opponent make a decision for all of his chips when i sense that. furthermore, i will usually let my opponents know that i was bluffing if i don't get called for future value

2. when i have the best of it i put all of my chips in the middle of the table and let an opponent make a mistake as that is where profit comes from in poker. the fact that my opponents know that i am capable of bluffing with all of my chips allows these two points to act as a sort of check and balance if you will.

don't be good, be lucky
johnny

[Spladle Master]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm curious if this is what the gist of harrington and sklansky will be saying. I try to play nl cash games in a similar way that holdem for advanced players recommends playing limit with two key exceptions:

1. i pride myself with having a very keen instinct on when an opponent will let go of a hand and i will make that opponent make a decision for all of his chips when i sense that. furthermore, i will usually let my opponents know that i was bluffing if i don't get called for future value

2. when i have the best of it i put all of my chips in the middle of the table and let an opponent make a mistake as that is where profit comes from in poker. the fact that my opponents know that i am capable of bluffing with all of my chips allows these two points to act as a sort of check and balance if you will.

don't be good, be lucky
johnny

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but assuming that you're not, I doubt Sklansky would ever use the phrase "don't be good, be lucky," and I also doubt that he would advocate using "keen instincts" to determine when an all-in bluff will be successful. I think the book will be a little more in-depth, with sections on how best to capitalize on aggressive players, attack passive players, hand selection, bet sizing, etc.

Maybe you got Sklansky confused with Brunson. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Although I'm pretty sure the section on NL hold 'em in SSII will be a little more in-depth than the one in SS.

[johnnybeef]

i am being slightly sarcastic. reason being that there are many times that good plays get beat. how many times do you see luck get beat? i suppose that i should also state that i do know that good plays beat luck in the long run as luck runs out, but i would rather be consistantly lucky than consistanly good. the second part of your statement was about playing on instinct. the most important thing i took away from supersystem is that good no limit players play be feel, this is something that can not be taught and it is perhaps the reason why there really aren't any good nolimit books out there. Mr. Sklansky is a technical genius and i can't wait to see how much he touches upon this.

johnny

[johnnybeef]

i am being slightly sarcastic. reason being that there are many times that good plays get beat. how many times do you see luck get beat? i suppose that i should also state that i do know that good plays beat luck in the long run as luck runs out, but i would rather be consistantly lucky than consistanly good. the second part of your statement was about playing on instinct. the most important thing i took away from supersystem is that good no limit players play be feel, this is something that can not be taught and it is perhaps the reason why there really aren't any good nolimit books out there. Mr. Sklansky is a technical genius and i can't wait to see how much he touches upon this.

johnny

[betgo]

The no limit cash games I play in are extremely loose. I play very tight, because I can play a round very cheaply for the blinds and wait for big hands or speculative hands I am getting the right implied odds, as well as postflop action when I have hit something big.

Some players play loose aggressively susccessfully in these games, but I am not comfortable playing this way at such loose tables. I will often play loose aggressively late in tournaments and SNGs, particularly with a big or small stack, when the blinds are big and some players are playing tightly for cash position.

Brunson mentions that a lot of the aggressive plays do not work at about $1,000 buyin (which would be atleast $2,000 today). He also says to play loose against tight players and tables to steal pots, but to play tight against loose players and tables. He does not directly give advice, but says how he would play a hand.

I kind of figure this Brunson guy knows what he is doing. In addition to the classic reputation of the book, he has won two WSOP championships, and rumor has it he has been beating the biggest NL games in Dallas and then Las Vegas for the last 40 years.

The original poster said all the existing NL books are terrible. I cannot agree that Super System is terrible.

I am sure the Sklansky NL book will be excellent. Sklansky is better at giving specific advice on how to play in certain situations than most authors including Brunson.

I think there is more of a lack of a decent NL tournament book. There is some good NL material in Sklansky's tournament book and even if Hellmuth's book. The Cloutier/McEvoy books are sort of the existing authority. However, some of their weak tight advice is so bizarre that I almost question the intentions of the authors. The Harrington and Raymer books should fill some of the void in this area.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I refuse to compare a poker book to the Torah, Bible, or any religious text

[/ QUOTE ]Right. Why compare fiction to non-fiction?

[kagame]

why compare something logical that has real utility to writings that have brainwashed billions and contributed to untold death, murder, and other unpleasant things possibly including but not in any stretch of the word limited to genocide?

obviously theyre not in the same league whatsoever. :-)

[Imperial]

Is David Sklansky considered one of the best NL-players in the world?