middle limit holdem

[etizzle]

I can't believe that this piece of trash was ever published. They give consistent and unquestionably terrible advice. I think this is the worst book on hold 'em i have ever read.

What the hell were briar and ciaffone thinking?

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is the worst book on hold 'em i have ever read.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must not have read very many.

[benkahuna]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe that this piece of trash was ever published. They give consistent and unquestionably terrible advice. I think this is the worst book on hold 'em i have ever read.

What the hell were briar and ciaffone thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Tight aggressive play using pot odds, implied odds and considering context of hand including player types and board texture... Based on real hands.

Yeah, what terrible advice... That's no way to play poker at all.

[etizzle]

it has you fold overpairs almost every time the flop is reraised.

it also has you fold AJ on a J high monotone board for one raise on the flop.

And it has you fold AT on a T98 board after it goes bet-raise into you.

This is making me sick.

[benkahuna]

[ QUOTE ]
it has you fold overpairs almost every time the flop is reraised.

it also has you fold AJ on a J high monotone board for one raise on the flop.

And it has you fold AT on a T98 board after it goes bet-raise into you.

This is making me sick.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think those are borderline calls at low limit. At middle limit, seems fine to me. I guess you don't much care for folding when it looks likely you're beat?

[MCS]

What other books have you read?

[bobbyi]

I think this is a really good book. In the games this book was written for, these were good plays. It sounds like you play in games that play differently. Fine. But it is asinine to flame a book for being written for different kinds of opponents than you are used to, particularly if the games you play in are the online midlimit games that didn't even exist at the time this book was written.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi bobbyi:

[ QUOTE ]
In the games this book was written for, these were good plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

In middle limit games where many players are capable of overly aggressive play, in my opinion these specific plays are anything but good plays.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi benkahuna:

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you don't much care for folding when it looks likely you're beat?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're thinking like this, especially at middle limit, you're not going to do very well. That's because there is a little something known as the size of the pot that comes into play.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi MCS:

That's certainly true.

best wishes,
mason

[PokerHorse]

Ciaffone actually played for a living for many years and played successfully in big/ pot limit games as well.
You might not fold in an internet 5-10 game when the board is t98 when you have at, but in a ring game this would be correct unless you already have a read on these players as being very loose aggressive. Especially if you were the pre-flop raiser.
if you look at hfap there are times when you fold top pair good kicker when simply bet into with players behind you.
This also might not be applicable to some internet games as well.
Ive never seen a post regarding a hand by mr malmuth that
showed me a much different outlook. usually they are player dependent. and dont be fooled, he plays well and he plays very tight for the most part.
there have been huge debates over calling a raise with aq from an early raiser. Again, poker is subject to probabilities but it is such a dynamic game that there just isnt black and white right or wrong in many many cases.
One point that mason wrote which is open for debate is the idea that middle limit games are somehow subject to players that are overly aggressive.
The higher you go the more aggression you will face. Whether it is " overly " aggressive is open to debate, but when players are pros they somehow can justify there over aggressive play with all kinds of rationale. you just need to take all this written information and find whats right for you from your own playing experience. if you are at the point where you feel that you can critique a poker book, then i wouldnt read too many more. it might just f you up. good luck

[etizzle]

i exaggerated. It is not the worst I've ever read, but it is by far the worst i've read of books i expected to be good.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe that this piece of trash was ever published. They give consistent and unquestionably terrible advice. I think this is the worst book on hold 'em i have ever read.

What the hell were briar and ciaffone thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the best book out there for giving many live examples of detailed, accurate analysis of pot odds, flop texture, and what of the many key considerations are most important in a given situation.

It's advice on what you should do based on that analysis is highly dependent based on the games you play, but I'll agree it seems not particularly relevant for the games I play.

-g

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In the games this book was written for, these were good plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

In middle limit games where many players are capable of overly aggressive play, in my opinion these specific plays are anything but good plays.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this. I was saying that this book is designed for games where your opponents aren't overaggressive and tricky. I have played in games like this, and for those games the advice in the book is good.

I've discovered good advice in this book that has helped my game. Some points I disagree on, but that in turn increases your own questioning and thinking about the dynamics of the game you play in.

Li.

MLH is a great book even though a lot of its advice is weak-tight. Where the book does an excellent job is in laying out the factors one should be considering when deciding how to play a hand (beyond mere pot size). Your relative position, whether you close the action, the size of the field, etc. SSH does a good job of stressing aggression, etc., but not nearly as good a job at walking through the "checklist" of items to consider when playing. MLH is a great book if you take its actual recommendations about how to play a particular hand, with some skepticism as to whether the advice applies in your (most likely, looser/more aggro, game).

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
i exaggerated. It is not the worst I've ever read, but it is by far the worst i've read of books i expected to be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that makes more sense.

I actually like Mason's rating of 6 +/- 2 based on how well you can work around some of its weak-tightness. I think that if you understand it errs on the side of caution, shall we say, then it's very good. It points out a LOT of things you should think about during hands.

I also like its format a lot.

[bilyin]

I hope everyone listens to you and does not read the book.

[bernie]

They were thinking/referring to games with a different texture than you're used to. Consider that when reading it. You may want to read the player descriptions again. You may appreciate it more should you find yourself against those types of opponents sometime.

I found it interesting to analyze the hand examples from start to finish to see how it could've been played better other than just the street that the question was on. You can see how one can get confused to where they're at based on how they played previous streets.

The overcards, bluffing and semi bluffing section were fantastic, imo.

Again, remember that it's not tailored to your average game today. That doesn't mean you won't encounter some of these types of players in todays game. Adjust accordingly.

Hell, post some hands from it and see what people think. But remember to give the game texture proper air time when you do it and not just present it as a general play.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
it has you fold overpairs almost every time the flop is reraised.

it also has you fold AJ on a J high monotone board for one raise on the flop.

And it has you fold AT on a T98 board after it goes bet-raise into you.

This is making me sick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes you should fold in those spots.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi bobbyi:

[ QUOTE ]
In the games this book was written for, these were good plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

In middle limit games where many players are capable of overly aggressive play, in my opinion these specific plays are anything but good plays.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't this book written before the poker boom?

b

[beset7]

in tight passive red chip live games many of these plays make sense to me.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope everyone listens to you and does not read the book.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. SSHE and Harrington's books are crap to. If you really want to improve your game, read "Play Poker Like the Pros!" :-)

[Indiana]

This is by far the best book around. Ciaffone/Reuben and company provide great examples and their advice. Of course, they are not always correct and this gets you thinking. Just post some hands that you feel are incorrect. I'd say that their answers are correct 80% of the time which is in itself very educative.

Indy

[etizzle]

bump because i just found this gem:

from pg 247: "(15) A 20-40 game. You open raise A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif A/images/graemlins/club.gif from early position, two MP players and the BB call.

The flop is K/images/graemlins/club.gif T/images/graemlins/club.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif. You bet, MP1 calls, and MP2 raises. What do you do?

Answer: Call. Reraising is a bad idea out of position. When the board flops all of one suite and there is a bet and a raise to you, then at least one of your opponents has a made flush or the nut flush draw. Since you have the A/images/graemlins/club.gif it is apparent that someone has the flush, and they are not laying it down. Save yourself some money by checking and calling."


LOL

[amulet]

i think this book has value. yes, it is weak tight, and the reader must have enough knowledge to understand in many of today's aggressive games, you must sometimes play differently from what the authors recommend. however, that is not the case in a lot of the examples. more importantly, this book more so then any other book stresses flop texture. i think that part alone makes this book helpful. additionally, there are a lot of helpful thoughts throughout the book. if the authore were writing it today, i suspect it would be a "better" book for today's games. but i think this book get dismissed to easily, and has a lot of value. etizzle, i think your missing a lot, if you just think this is trash.

[amulet]

after reading the other posters responses, it is nice to see that others agree with my thoughts on this book.

[Toonces]

[ QUOTE ]
bump because i just found this gem:

from pg 247: "(15) A 20-40 game. You open raise A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif A/images/graemlins/club.gif from early position, two MP players and the BB call.

The flop is K/images/graemlins/club.gif T/images/graemlins/club.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif. You bet, MP1 calls, and MP2 raises. What do you do?

Answer: Call. Reraising is a bad idea out of position. When the board flops all of one suite and there is a bet and a raise to you, then at least one of your opponents has a made flush or the nut flush draw. Since you have the A/images/graemlins/club.gif it is apparent that someone has the flush, and they are not laying it down. Save yourself some money by checking and calling."


LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

And just what hands do you put these guys on, especially the raiser, where he's unlikely to knock anyone out?

[bernie]

Why would you 3 bet this if it is very likely the guy has a made flush? Also note the type of game they are referring to it is likely that the guy raising would have the flush.

You're not in position to take a free card, and if the guy has a flush, it's not a value raise.(assuming the BB folded to the flop raise)

b

[etizzle]

you are right, there is definitely some decent stuff in the book, which is why i opened it again. Every once in a while though, I come across one of these hand examples and am completely shocked by what they suggest.