Blumpkin Told Me To Post This 75 Hand - Enormous Pot

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
etc etc That paragraph has too many if statements.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is what poker is all about. The paragraph is possibly the most amazing analysis I've ever read in a poker book.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean it like "whine the book is sooo complicated it has too many if statements"

I meant it like "Damn, blumkin, you have too many black chips in front of you".


I do think the paragraph is good because it gets across the point of how complicated the river anylsis can be.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

Gah I was an idiot with the folded comment, my bad (sorry long night at work). I thought 7csfap was going to be much better from all the good reviews I saw here and elsewhere, but I felt dissapointed after reading it. There just wasn't that much info on stud specific concepts from 4th street on. The book was a giant 3rd street hand chart which is very important of course, but I was able to deduce most of this with general poker knowledge. The specific topics section after was the real meat of the book for me and I felt like there could of been a lot more said on each of the topics. I was really dissapointed with the SH section as well. I really felt like the other 2p2 books were much better. I have a pretty good understanding of general poker knowledge/theory and had been playing stud for a while before I ordered it so my opinion is probably a little skewed.

[MRBAA]

While there is some excellent material, I also feel SCSFAP is pretty over rated (not to mention dated). But other than the Chip Reese chapter of SS, it's as good as there is. I suspect that if stud were more popular, you'd see better books coming out. I actually had an offer to write a stud book, but turned it down because the advance was low and projected sales were not good.

[BeerMoney]

RAISE TO GET IT HEADS UP!!