Slotboom on SSHE

[binions]

If this has been discussed, I apologize in advance. I wonder if Ed will take this criticism to heart in the 2nd edition.

http://www.rolfslotboom.com/

In the beginning of the book, Mr. Miller had an excellent analysis of calculating outs, where he gave a great description of the concept of partial outs. On page 101, he wrote: "You must account for partial outs when you are counting. If you count them for full value, you will overvalue your hand and call too often. If you discount them entirely, you will undervalue your hand and fold too much." His description of how to do this is truly excellent, and is indeed exactly the way most pros calculate their odds, despite the fact that to my knowledge no one before Mr. Miller had ever discussed it in print.

Therefore, I was genuinely disappointed when in the remainder of the book, in situations where drawing hands were behind and it was time to analyze their possible strength, the author himself used the old system of just counting the number of cards that could improve your hand, and not the odds of making your hand and then winning! For instance, on page 123, in a multiway pot (assumption from page 114), Miller estimates the 3c 2c on a flop Qc 8c 2h (i.e. bottom pair / low kicker / three high flush draw) as a "strong" hand, a "robust holding", and most importantly: as a fourteen-out draw. Now, in a multiway pot, this can almost never be correct. Even if you are not up against a higher flush draw (and in a multiway pot, you should take this possibility into consideration at all times, especially with your suited cards this small) you still can't count this hand as fourteen pure outs - exactly because of the reasons the author himself had given in earlier sections.

Quoting from page 106: "Decide how likely each card is to make you a winner. Some cards give you the nuts and are full outs. Others like overcards, that may not be enough to win if hit, or any card that may cause a split pot, should be discounted as partial outs." And, from the same page: "Decide how likely redraws are if you make your hand on the turn: potential redraws devaluate your hand."

Now, in this situation, because every turn card that improves your hand will still offer a whole lot of redraws, with not a single nut card in the deck and with the (albeit remote) possibility of even be drawing entirely dead (in the case of being up against a higher flush draw and a set), I think it is unforgivable to rate this hand as a fourteen-out draw. It is a hand that has fourteen cards to improve - but as the author has written himself, that is not the same. By counting outs in two manners (the "wrong" manner not just in this hand but also in a few others, and the "correct" manner like in the entire "Counting outs" section and also in hands like the one described on p. 241), he makes things unnecessary complicated for the readers who almost certainly get confused, for no other reason than that the author simply hasn't stayed consistent with his counting methods throughout the book.