Opinions

I recently logged on to this site because it was referred to repeatedly on the Tao of Poker & LasVegasVegas blogs. I am now fully addicted, mostly because of the help that the experienced players give to the beginners. I've played for over a year in both B&M's and online (with some success), & I'd like to know what the opinions are of Phil H from the following posters:
bholdr, sheridan_cat, POV, Orianas Daad, AKQJ10.

I was one of the ones that bought his book on hold'em, and I'm just curious as to what you all think about the guy's strategy...esp the "always 3-bet pre-flop" portion.

He has won 9 bracelets..but, do you think his strategies are weak or what?

Anybody?

[bubbahotep]

His books and videos are ridiculous and contain little in the way of valuable information. THats my take on it. (I have not read his books, but I have seen his videos - from what I understand the books contain the same nonsense as the videos)

[Pov]

I'm afraid I can't offer much help as I have not read Mr. Hellmuth's books or seen his videos. From what I have heard second hand, I think his advice may be too simplistic and by rote for players who are serious about improving and some people say some of the advice is flat out wrong. But to be fair, I have not read them myself. One thing I feel pretty sure about though is that when Phil is playing for himself, he never "always" does something. Everything is situation dependent.

For me, the best instructional book has easily been Theory of Poker. When I was just learning the game I stumbled across this book and it was a huge help. It doesn't really give advice on what starting hands to play or what to do in every situation. Instead it taught me what to think about and how to evaluate situations. If you really learn to understand where the money comes from in poker the factors that go into a particular game and hand then you can figure out what to do with your cards yourself and that's much more valuable. It's also much more difficult. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Here are some book reviews from Mason Malmuth - they're a year and a half old so you won't see new books in there, but he does review one of Phil's books. I've read several books that Mason reviews here and elsewhere and I think his reviews are pretty good. He is really a stickler for what he considers incorrect strategic advice and will chop a book down hard for it.

Mason's Book Reviews (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=450677&page=&view=&sb =5&o=)

edit: added the link

[SheridanCat]

Well, I haven't read that book since right after it came out. I remember not liking the hold'em advice much. I guess I should go back and take a look.

I know that it didn't strike me as a great book for beginners in hold'em. Now with Ed Miller's two books along with the other excellent 2+2 books, there's really no reason to spend too much time on the Hellmuth book. If you've read it already, that's cool. Just pick up Getting Started In Hold'em or Small Stakes Hold'em and use that to augment what you already know.

I do recall, and I know people on these forums has mentioned, that the non-hold'em sections of that book are pretty decent.

Finally, keep in mind that though Phil Hellmuth is a great tournament poker player, that doesn't necessarily translate into cash games at the levels we play them (us mortals). There are significant differences between cash and tournament play, and Hellmuth isn't really known for his excellent cash game play.

I hope that helps.

Regards,

T

[OrianasDaad]

I haven't got his book... yet. I will eventually, though. All I know about him is what I've seen on TV.

I'm curious about his 3-betting preflop strategy as well. On the surface, it sounds maniacal, but he may be on to something there.

Here's my logic:
-You can only 3-bet a raised pot.
-You can't 3-bet a pot that you open-raised.


That leaves it (primarily) to times when it is two bets to us and we haven't put any money into the pot yet. Now, poker literature is rife with the platitude "don't cold-call". I tend to agree.

Since "correct" cold-calls are so few-and-far-between, 3-betting each time you decide you should cold-call can't be too major of a mistake.

The other way we can 3-bet the pot is to limp, and then re-raise. This is rarely the best play, and I doubt he recommends it. He seems like the type of guy to push a value edge immediately.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other ways to 3-bet a pot. Since the only time you can be 3-betting is when facing a cold-call (or a single bet in the BB or after posting in the CO) then "always" is a bit misleading.

In the BB or CO after posting? Interesting. SSHE says basically to call with any hand that you would call from late position for one bet, but excluding some of the weak offsuit hands. I'm not sure here. Facing a situation where you could correctly cold-call - your 3-bet isn't going to drive too many people out of the pot. This could happen from the CO or BB with hands that you'd pay one bet to see the flop with. Raising in these situations with small PP and Axs could hurt your implied odds for the rest of the hand. Tough call here. I don't know anything about Phil's strategy when playing from the blinds.

He mabye would have been better off to say "never cold-call, always 3-bet or fold". This alleviates the two situations where "always 3-bet" probably isn't best.

Then again, I haven't read the book. I could be (and probably am) way off the mark.

Edit: I just read Mason's review and indeed, he calls it "a maniac aggressive approach" to limit hold'em. Be careful with this style of play.

Thank you for the reference to Mason's reviews.
I have read several of the books he reviewed, and it was nice to be able to get an expert's perspective on them.

Thanks to all who responded with their candid opinions.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
I do recall, and I know people on these forums has mentioned, that the non-hold'em sections of that book are pretty decent.

Finally, keep in mind that though Phil Hellmuth is a great tournament poker player, that doesn't necessarily translate into cash games at the levels we play them (us mortals). There are significant differences between cash and tournament play, and Hellmuth isn't really known for his excellent cash game play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%. Well, except that I admit that I don't really know how PH does in cash games, but I'm pretty sure he's not playing in the Foxwoods $2/4, the Commerce $3/6, or anything of the like. His HE, especially LHE, advice is just about useless in low-limit games. I always think of him when I see my opponents call with 99 or 88 to the river with three overcards on board and spirited betting. Medium pairs (http://poker.wikicities.com/wiki/LHE:Preflop:Pair)just don't have that much value in low-limit games unless they hit a set (http://poker.wikicities.com/wiki/LHE:Flop:Set), because it's virtually assured the overcards will hit someone when 6 or 7 are in every pot.

So to the specific question of always 3-betting preflop: I forget in what context he says this, but if it's only his "Top Ten Hands" it's not too bad. Still, 88 and 77 are mostly only good for set value, so it'd be better to get in as cheap as possible. Most low-limit players call two bets with any hand they were going to play anyway, so you're not going to drive out A9 or QT. A good thing about raising preflop is that it makes you the aggressor and can buy you a free card on the flop, so raising occasionally near the button in a multiway pot with middle pairs is probably a reasonable move. You still most likely need to hit a set, but if 6 or 7 are in the pot you're almost getting a value raise, and chances are decent everyone will check the flop and maybe even the turn to you, and occasionally those free cards will hit. But I certainly don't think something like 88 or AQo is generally worth a 3-bet.

As SheridanCat mentioned, the non-HE stuff is pretty good. If you want to learn a bit about stud high, 8/b, and razz; Omaha 8/b; and PL Omaha high, it's worth the cover price.

[AKQJ10]

Appendix: Orianas raises a good point -- in general most hands are worth either a reraise or a fold against a raise. AFAIK the big exception is drawing hands in an already-multiway pot.

[bholdr]

I do not own philH's book, nor have i read it in detail, but i did skim it at barnes and noble's once... i wasn't particularly impressed.

If he were to write a book that focused primarily on tournament strategy, i'd probably be more inclined to give it a real read, but my impression of phil h's book is that it focused on 'how' and not 'why', which is why i really enjoy sklansky, etc, more than most authors, they focus on the WHY behind any particular situation or action.