Phil Gordon's Little Green Book

By complete coincidence, i just went to Vegas to play a concentrated amount of no limit with both the Gordon book and Ciaffone and Reuben. I think the two complement each other very well. Newer players will get a lot more ABC stuff from the Gordon book, while Ciaffone and Reuben has a lot more depth to it when you start thinking about the concepts they present. It depends on your experience and how much you want to be spoonfed, but for people that are relative no limit noobs like me starting with gordon and moving on seems like a good bet.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like every fifth or sixth word is "I," and probably 20 percent of the words could be eliminated.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said the book is about how he plays, therefore "I" would be expected. He also states that he doesn't expect everyone to agree with everything he says. He in fact hopes that we find some things to disagree with because that means we are thinking.

[ QUOTE ]
I find it amazing that these major publishers don't do basic editing

[/ QUOTE ]

cough>Harrington<cough

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi tek:

There's a major difference between a complete lack of editing and proof reading failures. While we are not at all happy with the type-o's that appeared in the first printings of the Harrington books, I assure you that the editing was a major effort. Also, we were fortunate in that the manuscripts submitted to us were wonderfully written.

By the wat, if Phil Gordon is interested, we at Two Plus Two will help him solve these problems for the next edition, and we gain nothing by doing so.

Best wishes,
Mason

I think the book is great. I agree with the poster about the use of "I". I assumed he wrote this because he wrote in the beginning of the book that the info he presents works for him but perhaps not for everyone.

I put this book up there with HOH. It one of the best out there. I'm hoping that the Sklansky book will be as good as The Little Green Book and HOH. Can't wait.

[gergery]

I read thru in the bookstore the other day and thought it was awesome. I was very impressed.

It goes in the category of "simple, easy advice, fast read", and will significantly help beginners and intermediates with NL tourney play.

Harrington's books are more comprehensive and deeper, but this was far beyond my expectations.

-g

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I'm now almost done with Phil Gordon's Little Green Book and while my comments of the targeted audience still apply, my evaluation of the book has gone up. It's definitely worth an 8 or a 9.

Also, the writing problems that I mentioned don't seem to be anywhere near as severe in the second half. But they still exist and hopefully Phil will rewrtie much of the text before the next printing.

Eventually I will publish a more formal review.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Jimmy James]

I absolutely loved Phil's book. While it's not as in-depth as the Harrington series, I do feel as though a learned a few things from it. As far as no limit holdem books go, I'd give it a 9, would be a 10 if there was more content, as it's a pretty quick read.

[larrondo]

I do find the writing style to be somewhat irritating and it is possible to write in first person without using 'I' in every sentence. However, I think the content is pretty good. A nice suppliment to Harrington. I don't like it quite as much as Improve Your Poker by Ciaffone, but it's well worth the money.

[paulish]

[ QUOTE ]
2. How likely is my hand to improve?

If my hand is unlikely to improve, I tend to bet more than 2/3 of the pot. I want to take this pot now.

If my hand is somewhat likely to improve, say about 15% to 20% of the time, I am more apt to bet 2/3 of the pot.

If my hand is very likely to improve (about 34% of the time or more), I am more apt to bet 1/2 of the pot.


[/ QUOTE ] excerpt from Gordon's book on Full Tilt

isn't this way to general? What about position? What if you put in a continuation bet on the flop, in position... and you get re-raised?

[ QUOTE ]
Completely missing the flop is a good indicator for a continuation bet, since it costs you nothing extra to walk away from your hand when your move fails. If, however you have a draw to a big hand then a continuation bet could be a big mistake, giving your opponent another chance to chase you out of the pot

[/ QUOTE ]
-HoHII (p.9-10)

[AEKDBet]

They are almost saying the same thing

[ QUOTE ]
If my hand is somewhat likely to improve, say about 15% to 20% of the time, I am more apt to bet 2/3 of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This can be "the big mistake". Phil is saying when he chooses not to check-> bets ~2/3,