Should I buy the most influential poker book of all time?

[Jman28]

I've read HPFAP plenty of times. Do I need Hold'em Poker ?

-Jman28

[splashpot]

When Mason says that Hold'em Poker is the most influential book, I think he only means that it was the first book to introduce those topics. It paved the way for books like TOP and HPFAP. While I haven't read Hold'em Poker, I imagine it covers the same topics as the other two books in less detail.

[moot]

I've thumbed through it before. It's a book for beginners.

If you've read through HPFAP and have a decent understanding of the concepts then HP will have little if nothing to offer you.

[jdl22]

he meant most influential in terms of the poker literature. HPFAP covers the same material but came later and was largely based on HEP hence according to Mason it's less influential.

[Wally Weeks]

[ QUOTE ]
When Mason says that Hold'em Poker is the most influential book, I think he only means that it was the first book to introduce those topics. It paved the way for books like TOP and HPFAP. While I haven't read Hold'em Poker, I imagine it covers the same topics as the other two books in less detail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Influence and utility of Hold 'em Poker are mutually exclusive, especially for many readers of this forum. It just happened to be one of the first poker books I bought and read, so it was both for me. /images/graemlins/smile.gif It was the first place where I read about semi-bluffing, the free card play, etc.

Hold 'em Poker is definitely a better place to start than HEFAP. I also preferred reading TOP before going further and reading HEFAP. I'm a big fan of the "better to build a foundation" motto as opposed to jumping in and building the house. After all, poker is about the long run (just like anything else that requires skill to become sufficiently good at).

Regards,
Wally

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
I've read HPFAP plenty of times. Do I need Hold'em Poker ?

-Jman28

[/ QUOTE ]


"Need" is an odd word, but (sort of) to answer your question, I believe you should purchase the book and read it as it certainly will not hurt your game, and studying the fundamentals and reading through them, there is material in the first NOT covered in the advanced, and even if you pick up one piece of advice, that could make you countless additional monies (or save you bets) down the road.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[slavic]

My philosophy has been to just read everything.

Helmuth's first book was really trying in this aspect, so I didn't even bother with his second.

Hold'em Poker it's a easy and quick read. Your not going to find anything earth shaking but it's also good to replay the fundamentals every now and then.

[bwana devil]

[ QUOTE ]
My philosophy has been to just read everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

i believe this is bad advice. if youre talking about a 2+2 book as the OP is that is one thing. if youre talking about literally reading any poker book such as a phil book, that is bad advice especially in early development stages as a player. you shouldnt digest all poker knowledge and think you can filter out the bad advice from the rest if you dont have a solid foundation.

also weigh the opporutnity cost of the decision as well (which is less important though). the time you spend reading a bad book is time you could be spending reading a good poker book.

[k8as8ey]

Yes, read it. Even if you find one paragraph in the entire book that helps your game, it will be worth it in the long run. Looking at a concept differently or understanding the reasoning behind a certain principle will help you bring in the $$. If not, it will at least keep you thinking about correct play and reinforce the fundamentals.

[KenProspero]

I love Hold 'em Poker. Like you, I started with HPFAP, and honestly found it was more work than I was willing to put in at the time.

I then decided I wasn't 'advanced' enough, and got Hold 'em Poker, which really helped.

However, having said this, if you're doing well with HPFAP, I'd probably recommend getting TOP instead of Hold 'em Poker. You really can't go wrong either way, though.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
However, having said this, if you're doing well with HPFAP, I'd probably recommend getting TOP instead of Hold 'em Poker. You really can't go wrong either way, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have TOP. I have a lot of poker books. I'm just wondering if there's anything in Hold'em Poker that I haven't already learned.

-Jman28

[KenProspero]

Hold 'em Poker is a good book to have in your library. Also because it's shorter, it may be easier to find anything you have a question about.

If you've already spent the time on TOP and HPFAP, though, Hold em Poker is probably not essential, IMO.

[Paul2432]

I think there are some sections of HEP that are not covered anywhere else. I think the "flops you like" section is worth the price of the book alone.

In retrospect its obvious, but I thought discussions of why, for example, K82 is a much better flop for AA than A82 were quite thought provoking.

Paul

[popniklas]

Yes, the flop section is great. I can't recall another book I have read (2+2 or other) that has anything quite like the "flops you like" section. Reading and thinking about that section is very healthy.

If you are a very good and experienced player, you MIGHT think that everything in HEP is either something you heard/read/figured out before or flat out obvious. On the other hand, you might find something that isn't. I think you'd better be on the safe side and buy it. Actually, I decided to buy it myself as wrote this post... (I had borrowed it at the library when I read it.)