Bob Ciaffone is not respected

[spurgeon]

I just read a thread that said that Bob Ciaffone is not respected much at two plus two forums. Why?

[Iceman]

[ QUOTE ]
I just read a thread that said that Bob Ciaffone is not respected much at two plus two forums. Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

He gives simplistic, weak-tight advice, and has little knowledge of limit poker.

[Doubling12]

Don't believe it. His books are very fundamentally sound.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't believe it. His books are very fundamentally sound.

[/ QUOTE ]

His Improve Your Poker is great, Middle Limit Fold'em is however insanely weak-tight, laying down non-nut flush draws for one bet in an average 20/40 game is not good poker.

All of Middle Limit Fold'em makes perfect sense, for NO limit, not for limit.

[Beavis68]

His pot-limit/no-limit book got a good review and is well respected on the forums.

[helpmeout]

Middle Limit Holdem is one of the best books out there, dont talk rubbish.

Sure some parts are a bit weak-tight but he is talking about playing against good opponents not your average chimp.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
Middle Limit Holdem is one of the best books out there, dont talk rubbish.

Sure some parts are a bit weak-tight but he is talking about playing against good opponents not your average chimp.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are plenty of chimps left at middle limits. And good players in hold'em don't always have the nuts or a nut draw when they bet, which Ciaffone seems to think. (Actually many of the chimps are more likely to have the nuts when betting than good opponents are.)

Search the forums for endless discussions on the 'merits' of folding a non-nut flush draw for a single bet. Iirc Mason said he folds in less than half of the cases Ciaffone advocated folding.

Edit: All that said, MLH is the third most thought provocative book I've read, and is probably also the third most important book for improving my hold'em. Not because I agree with Ciaffone, but because I so often disagree and their reasoning is well laid out. I've argued many of the hands with the book.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
I just read a thread that said that Bob Ciaffone is not respected much at two plus two forums. Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you link the thread so we can see exactly who is(are) making these comments. I can find threads on 2+2 that claim Sklansky and Malmuth are wrong, but the posters are less than credible...

[ZeeBee]

Well, Mason certainly respects Ciaffone - and has stated so publicly in Poker Essays 3.

ZB

[amulet]

i know that the people who run/own 2 + 2 respect bob a lot. and his books and advice are terrific.

[Rudbaeck]

I suck at reading comprehension. I absolutely respect Bob Ciaffone, two of his three books are top notch, and the third is still a good book. (Even if it's weak tight it's way above your average poker book.) His card player articles are usually very good.

I seriously wish he did a No Limit book in the MLH format.

And I think it's MLH specifically that's been flamed on occasion, not Ciaffone as a person or any of his other books.