Review: The Making Of A Poker Player (Matros)

[nate1729]

Disclaimer. I was uniquely disposed to like this book. Matt Matros went to Yale, was a math major (but never took a course in game theory), is an avid poker player, and got his MFA in creative writing. I am a week away from graduating from Yale; I'm a math major (who never took a course in game theory,) but I want to be a writer; I'm an avid poker player. Let's just say a whole lot of the book hit close to home.

Narrative. There's a lot to be enjoyed just in following Matt through his early tournaments and home games. His RGP fanaticism is a little much, but just about everything else is engaging. For serious players, reading about his first home games will probably bring back memories; for beginners, reading about big-time casino experiences will probably provide a vicarious thrill. (And just about everyone will enjoy the afterword, wherein he describes his WPT run. It's the McManus Effect: hearing about someone else's run through a big tournament is far more captivating than there's any good reason for it to be.

Strategy. Lots of good stuff. The game theory excursion was one of the most enjoyable sections; it was enough to get me to resolve to learn some of this stuff. Part of me wishes he'd have described more of his tournament hands in strategic detail, but there's already a lot of content.

Annoyances. The recommended reading is a short step from insane. I'm just going to hope that Matros recommended Ken Warren's book for sentimental reasons, because Ken Warren couldn't give coherent poker advice if his life depended on it.* HEPFAP is only given "Other Interesting Books" status, and he says to ignore what I believe is good material on loose games and shorthanded games. Also, earlier in the book he says that HEPFAP is just a set of opening standards and a collection of plays, and I don't think that's a fair grounds for criticism; if you understand all the material you'll be able to play well without being told explicitly what to do with Nth pair on every street. Also, there is a slight problem with his recommendation of The Mathematics of Poker; as I understand, the book isn't out yet. That would have been a good thing to mention.

Also, there are more grammatical mistakes than are comfortable to read. Sklansky and Malmuth almost take pride in punctuating incorrectly, but if you're not going to be obnoxious about it, at least get it right. (Isn't that what proofreaders are for?)

Overall. Good stuff. Worth the fifteen bucks.

--Nate




*Sample Ken Warren advice:
-You should be sadder to lose your money to a tight player than a loose player.
-You should stretch your hand requirements against a loose player, so you win his money before everyone else does.
-Don't raise AK preflop except under very special circumstances... you don't even have a pair yet!

[binions]

I enjoyed the book as well, although I did sense a bit of a grudge Matt holds for 2+2 authors and community, probably stemming from his RGP upbringing. And the Warren recommendation is insane.

[nate1729]

"A bit of a grudge"? You mean, that part where he accuses everyone of groupthink? Yeah, just a bit.

[jacksup]

Nate,

Thanks for a positive overall review. The Mathematics of Poker was supposed to be out long before my book. So much for believing in publication dates.

Would you mind pointing out some of the grammatical mistakes?

Thanks,
Matt

P.S. I would rather lose a pot to a loose player than a tight player any day.
P.P.S. I certainly play looser against a loose player than against a typical player.
P.P.P.S. I certainly raise AK every chance I get, but I don't think it's so bad for beginners to limp with it.

[nate1729]

Matt --

Fair enough.

My beef with Warren's advice is that he recommends altering your playing standards against the loose player. (Now, one should do this, but he gives no good specific advice, and the fact that it is technically true does not change the fact that he's probably recommending it for the wrong reason.) Also, beginners might limp with AK for a few reasons, but they're giving up gobs of EV.

Some grammar and usage mistakes (I just opened the book to random pages to find most of these):

"ensure" / "insure" on page 151.
"pot commit" should be hyphenated on 191.
There should be a comma after "namely" on 192.
"ram and jam" should be hyphenated on 192.
There should (probably) be a comma after "in real poker" on 196.
There should not be a comma in "you lose, and brilliant" on 196.
Lots more inappropriate/missing commas (I know there's some disagreement in the theory of comma usage, but I honestly think that some readability was lost.)
Lots more missing hyphens.

There was a really annoying dangling modifier somewhere, but I had lost my pen by the time I got to it.

Not grammar, but on page 95: "...posting [a late-position blind] is never a good play..." -- huh?

I'm pretty sure "all of which could be at risk" is dangling (p. 95.)

"may" / "might" on page 81.



Anyway, you get the idea.

--Nate

[tipperdog]

By far, the best reason to buy this book is that it's a great read. I'm a tough judge of writing and it's clear that Matros has real talent (I guess the years in the MFA program weren't wasted after all) [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

It's a difficult book to categorize because it's not a strategy book in the HEFAP sense, but it contains far more strategy than say, Holden's Big Deal. Still, I'd place it more in the Holden/narrative genre than the S&M/2+2/instruction manual genre.

I agree with Nate that Matt's "reading list" is off, but for different reasons. For example, Matt recommends HEFAP, but adds that the shorthanded and loose games sections should be completely ignored. Huh? That's a pretty strong statement. But if memory serves, there's no discussion about WHAT he finds so objectionable. IMO, if you're going to make a statement like that, you need to back it up. (I'm not looking at the book now, so the exact wording of MM's HEFAP commentary may be slightly off).

[jacksup]

Nate,

Nice catch on ensure/insure. And I agree there are some missing hyphens, although I do think it's best to err on the side of too-few [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] hyphens. I stand by pretty much all of the comma decisions, though. Sorry that you feel the readability was affected by some of my style choices.

"Posting is never a good play" would've been more accurate as "posting can never be a positive EV play for that individual hand, but it's possible that some good players can recoup the lost EV through their edge on future hands." But I think the narrative is OK without this explanation.

Have a good Commencement.

Matt

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
"Posting is never a good play" would've been more accurate as "posting can never be a positive EV play for that individual hand, but it's possible that some good players can recoup the lost EV through their edge on future hands." But I think the narrative is OK without this explanation.

[/ QUOTE ]
(I'm assuming you're talking about coming into the game initially -- not posting after you've missed the blinds.)

In a 9-handed ring game, posting behind the button buys you six hands for one small bet. Waiting for the big blind buys you 9 hands for 1.5 small bets. (You get better pot odds in your small blind by waiting, but that's offset by having to play out of position when paying the big blind.)

I'd rather post behind the button than wait the better part of an orbit.

[nate1729]

Thanks for the quick response. I recognize the difference between matters of style and objective matters of grammar (and that there were many more of the former.)

Thanks again for a great read; hopefully I'll have the chance to be on the other end of one of these threads someday.

--Nate

[Craig C]

I just finished the book and found it very entertaining. It was a good mix of technical information and story telling.

I think that Matt has hit a good mix of appealing to someone who might read to learn more about odds, betting, and game theory and a casual reader who wants to be entertained about the poker craze.

I gotta see if I have the WPT Final on my TIVO still [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

CC