ONE GOOD IDEA

[Al Mirpuri]

When purchasing poker books many players use the 'one good idea' criterion. This is the notion that if a poker book contains one good idea in it that you can take back to the tables and turn into cash then the book has paid for itself. There are books that fail this criterion but it is a liberal criterion.

So tell me about the one good idea you have found.

Here is my instance: I purchased Killer Poker by John Vorhaus. Vorhaus is a professional writer and is a competent poker player. However, his book covered much ground that is already well covered. Though anyone who has not read anything on the pyschological side of sitting in a poker game could purchase it instead of any number of other books on that particular aspect of poker. I got a number of good ideas from his book but the best was: the concept of absolut. Absolut is a card game played with a deck of 24 cards; AKQJT9 in the four suits. Now play NFHE as if you were playing absolut with an absolut deck. Obviously, this trick tightens up your game. Yes, everyone knows you should not play loose in a NFHE game. However, his presentation of the idea is novel and convincing.

[bigpooch]

1) Zadeh's Winning Poker System

Monte Carlo simulations for starting hands.

Not so much as an idea but a philosophy/methodology for
starting hands. Norman Zadeh wrote Winning Poker Systems,
primarily geared towards draw only and there is some theory
there (btw, there were still some errors). The idea is
simply to do what he did, not only for draw (I have done it
for the structures that exist for Paradise's high only draw)
but also for short-handed LHE. Hence, use the inexpensive
computer resources (and programs) we have now compared to
what he had then, to determine approximately what hands are
worth playing!

I am currently using Wilson Software's Turbo Texas Hold'em
(which does play quite awful at some times!), but I still
crunch out the numbers and determine the hands based on the
Monte Carlo simulations using a few table compositions.
There is no doubt that the researcher has to be careful
because of the flaws in the way some of the profiles play
and it would be even harder to approximate the equity value
of some common mistakes seen at the tables (e.g., the -EV
for playing A2o in each of the positions excluding the
button in terms of BBs). Nevertheless, it is a very good
idea to have an independent methodology for starting hands
depending on game conditions (although the starting guides
are usually quite good). I was aware of this idea since
reading his book and it's simply the best approach to find a
starting hands baseline according to the research and also
see how much of an adjustment must be made according to
table composition. TTH isn't a great program, but it's a
start and any conclusions have to be taken with a grain of
salt.

So how big of an advantage in my starting hand selection do
I have on typical opponents because of this? It's hard to
say in LHE, since there are so many variables and I won't
say how much it is in high only draw! Also, it's not how
good this baseline is, it's how pathetic the opposition is!
At least, that's one task that is almost automatic: before
the flop play. Also, much more money is made on the turn
and the river in the typical game.

By the way, it is important also to have discipline (most
don't have it!) for otherwise, all this kind of work would
be not nearly as important as eradicating emotional ties to
winning or losing a pot.


2) Sklansky's Theory of Poker

Recognize, observe and exploit opponents' mistakes.

Strangely enough, I don't have my copy anymore but I assure
you I must have read it through at least three or four times
from cover to cover (once, I even made notes to each chapter
in the first half of the book). In the very last chapter,
there is a summary of mistakes to look for and to take
advantage of. Since poker players play all over the map,
they make all kinds of mistakes and it's nice to know how to
adjust according to their flaws! This is the kind of clear
thinking an expert ought to have and this kind of thinking
leads to saving the raise for the turn with a vulnerable
hand such as TPTK in loose games as explained in the new
edition of HPFAP (section on loose games).

A good example decades ago: I was observing a woman playing
and when she had position against only a few players, I
picked up a tell on how she threw chips into the pot when
she was bluffing (she got caught once and a few times, she
had the goods!). She was making an obvious mistake of
almost always betting when checked to! Needless to say, I
made full use of this knowledge: I check-raised her on two
hands to take the pot without a real hand (one hand I may
have held the best hand with Ace high but I dare not take
any chances!).

Online, it's much much harder, but it's still important to
notice people that "button bluff" and thereby give them a
chance to lose an extra bet they weren't intending to lose
more money! Also, it's important to recognize players that
raise on the turn that are just semibluffing because most of
the time I am just geared to thinking that raiser often has
TPTK beat! Nowadays, with almost all sites giving the
player the ability to type in notes, playing poker online is
simply the stone cold nuts!

Unfortunately, it's harder to notice players at so many
tables if you are multitabliing and admittedly I am one of
the worst offenders (usually play 4 to 6 tables at once)!
Maybe I am just using volume to extract more money on a per
hour basis to exploit the most common error of all: calling
instead of folding.

[Al Mirpuri]

There is a chap called Will Hyde (now deceased) who wrote The Lowball Book under the name of Justin Case. The Lowball Book appeared at the end of a book Hyde wrote called Percentage Hold'em.

In this book, he pointed out something that I had not seen in Winning Poker Systems by Norman Zadeh, SuperSystem by Doyle Brunson or Winning Concepts in Draw and Lowball by Mason Malmuth (and all these books are considered must reads for A-5 California Lowball).

Will Hyde pointed out that any hand in any particular category, eg Ten high or Seven high, if not accompanied by its adjacent card will be able to beat 50 percent or more of the hands in that category. So a Ten-Eight will beat 50 percent or more of Tens whilst an Eight-Six will beat 50 percent or more of Eights and so on . He explained this concept better than I did but the point is if you have an idea of your opponent's hand knowing that if you fall in the same hand classification that you will be able to beat 50 percent or more of your opponent's hands will give you the courage to bet.

This book also had other information of value which I will leave for you all to discover for yourselves.

I wonder if Mason Malmuth has read this book and what he makes of it.

The Lowball Book is available for free download. (http://www.textfiles.com/fun/lowball.txt)


Please virus scan whatever you download as I have a strong suspicion that this file is infected (though I may be wrong).