Gambling Theory And Other Topics

K-mac · #1 09-01-2005, 03:58 PM

I purchased GTAOT a few days ago and have read a bit of it. After reading about non-self weighting strategies, i was wondering if Mason, or any other knowledgeable person could tell me if the advice/guidelines set forward in such books as Hold Em Poker and SSHE would fall under the category of non-self weighting strategies?

#2 09-01-2005, 04:04 PM

K-mac · #3 09-01-2005, 04:31 PM

BTW, Holdem Poker and SSHE do not suck.

Just noticed that in my post i typed a 'k' instead of a 'h' (or is it an 'h')
it was supposed to read in sucH books.
Sorry about that

popniklas · #4 09-01-2005, 05:12 PM

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
BTW, Holdem Poker and SSHE do not suck.

Just noticed that in my post i typed a 'k' instead of a 'h' (or is it an 'h')
it was supposed to read in sucH books.
Sorry about that

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol, typos are funny sometimes.

K-mac · #5 09-01-2005, 05:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Lol, typos are funny sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, it was a real hoot.... i felt like a jack ass when i saw the first response.... LOL

pipes · #6 09-01-2005, 09:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I purchased GTAOT a few days ago and have read a bit of it. After reading about non-self weighting strategies, i was wondering if Mason, or any other knowledgeable person could tell me if the advice/guidelines set forward in such books as Hold Em Poker and SSHE would fall under the category of non-self weighting strategies?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any tight aggressive style is non-self weighting. Raising many preflop limpers with JJ is nonself weighting. You won't win all the time, but you'll win a good enough % of the time that the preflop raise is a good bet.

benkahuna · #7 09-02-2005, 04:52 AM

No offense, but if you have to ask the question, you didn't understand that part of Mason's book. Or maybe you did understand, but you have no faith in your convictions...

K-mac · #8 09-02-2005, 02:35 PM

None taken. I sort of interpretted the non-self weighting strategy as something that may not be able to be put into a book. Almost as if it was something that is played differently everytime. So, i guess you could say i did misunderstand it, otherwise i would not have asked about it.
Thank you for the responses.

King Yao · #9 09-02-2005, 03:23 PM

When I read that book (back in 1992 or 1993), I didn't understand that chapter. I had to read it several times before it finally clicked (it may have been a year or two later that it finally clicked). I finally realized the moral of that chapter is: tight/aggressive is good.