Warren's book?

[binions]

Warren first wrote Winners Guide to Texas Holdem. That book had you folding hands like QJ suited unless you were in late position. Ultra weak-tight strategy.

Not satisfied with his first book sales, err, book, he then writes Ken Warren Teaches Texas Holdem.

So what does he do? He says play any hand that adds up to 21 and suited aces and pairs. The total opposite extreme of his first book. Anyone really think KT offsuit is profitable in early position?

The man has no credibility, much less authority, to instruct anyone how to play.

[yeltzen]

I think Warren's book is one of the best, if not THE best beginning HOld'em books there is. Both of them.

[ncskiier]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Warren's book is one of the best, if not THE best beginning HOld'em books there is. Both of them.

[/ QUOTE ]
You know I value your recommendations. Are you being serious this time? I have the first book and I didn't think it was terrible. It actually made me think of a few things for the first time. I've since forgotten what those things were. And binions, K+T<21.

[KenProspero]

Warren has two books out, I can't remember which one this was in, but I remember the comments about women, the aged, tattood people (didn't remember the one about the disabled or the racial ones, but maybe I decided to put the book down before I got to those).

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]

And binions, K+T<21.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the KW Teaches Holdem book. I sold it a long time ago. If I recall, hands that add up to 20 or 21 he says you can play at any time. I distinctly recall objecting to the recommendation because it would allow you to play KT offsuit UTG.

[binions]

Ken Warren Teaches Texas Hold ’em (2 out of 10) by Ken Warren.

Even though this is a big book that covers many topics, much of it is quite confused once you get past the filler material. For example, keeping records by the day of the week has virtually no value (due to the large relative variance on small samples) and having as your usual “main objective to play your hand for one bet” (to see the flop) is a distorted view of hold ’em in particular and poker in general.

But it gets worse than this. The starting hand advice is off and should get you trapped with many second best hands while advice to fold hands for one bet on the flop that have some value is frequently wrong especially if the pot is big. Also, the author needs to realize that unless the pot is very large you want players to call one bet for two or three out hands (as opposed to folding for two bets) even though they will beat you on occasion, and it is frequently correct to slowplay hands like bottom set.

There’s also other inaccurate advice: His jackpot chapter assumes that player’s hands are statistically independent which is not true in community board games, he folds too often if the player in the blind bets the flop, he seems to think that players with four flushes (where two suited cards are in your hand) or open end straight draws will fold if it is two bets to them, when making decisions he often fails to take into account the possible action on future rounds, and much more.

[TwoShedsJackson]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe its in the section about player images. He talks about how crippled people in wheelchairs tend to be tigher players, cause they aren't going anywhere for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahahahhaa, nice and PC [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[yeltzen]

Sorry; no, I'm not being serious.
I've heard it's very bad, but I've never read it.

[binions]

Let's see - it gave the odds against picking up Aces at 221:1.

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

It says you can play any hand that adds to 20 or 21 (plus pairs and suited aces) from any position. No mention of suited connectors. That means limping UTG with KT offsuit is OK, but you can't play 87 suited on the button after 4 limpers.

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

And it gives several examples on when to raise on the flop to "exclude people", and all of them were top pair or better hands (including a flopped straight on a rainbow board)!

These are value raises, not raising to exclude people per se, and it shows Warren's fundamental misunderstanding of one of the important premises of TOP and SSHE - raising the flop when you are behind to increase your chances of winning (by knocking someone else out who might beat you when you catch your card).

[jojobinks]

i can't give examples of how bad ken warren teaches texas hold 'em is, b/c although it was my first poker book, i put it down and never picked it up again as soon as i found more useful books. i just went to the shelf to find some of the terrible advice, and can't even read a page. it's so worthless. it's about poker, and that's the best thing i can say for it.

however: it's a horrible teaching book.