Avg Score/How Good Is Your Limit Hole'em

[charlie_t_jr]

Kind of a senseless post, but I'm curious. I finished up "How Good Is Your Limit Hold'em" recently and my avg score for the 24 hands was 82.

To others who have read the book, how did you do?

I got 100....

but I cheated.

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
I got 100....

but I cheated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha....

Great book. I was hoping for maybe an overview, or overall score system at the end...small complaints though.

[xadrez]

Any plans for a sequel to HGIYLH???

[h11]

I got 73 on average. So the book was extremely useful for me. I'm convinced that with hard work I can become a player who could score 74 on that test.

[asdtexas]

Byron,

What do you think is a good score for a winning player?

BTW, in my opinion, HGYLHE is the 2005 cash game book of the year. HOH2 and the Little Green Book win for NL Tourney and possibly cash play. Congratulations.

[newhizzle]

i also got an 82 overall

there were a couple of spots i disagree with, like for example, i dont think he value bets the river enough, but overall, i thought it was a very good book

[ QUOTE ]
Byron,

What do you think is a good score for a winning player?

BTW, in my opinion, HGYLHE is the 2005 cash game book of the year. HOH2 and the Little Green Book win for NL Tourney and possibly cash play. Congratulations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks very much for the positive feedback.

I would say that anything over 90 is a very good score. Players who favour 6-max and short handed play will probably score better than full ring players. Many of the hands see action based around a fight for the blinds from late position - a scenario more typical of 6-max play. Also some of the favoured plays involve aggressive handling of moderate holdings - again typical of short handed play.

I think that in many of the hands a score of 90 is much the same as a score of 100. Some of the suggested plays are controversial and a strong case can be made for alternative methods. However, I don't think there are any hands where a strong case can be made for a sequence of plays which ends up scoring much less than 90.

I suspect that anyone who averages less than 80 will struggle in games above 5-10.

Finally, I think there are certain hands in the book that are more important than others. I think it is essential to score well on hands 2, 6, 14, 15, 18 and 23. These hands feature many fairly common situations that are frequently misplayed by weaker players.

[MrEngenic]

I also got 82. Most hands were 85-90 with a few 100 and a few 50-70 scores.
50 in hand 9, playing 55 against a steal, 64 in hand 20 with 54s HU against a shark.
100 in hands 17,18 and 19.

However, I would not have scored this good if I only had 10 seconds to react on every decision as it often is when I multitable. I also had some trouble with the reads as online my reads are x/y/z and maybe a note.