matt maroon book???

What is the title of this book?

[RatFink]

Winning Texas Hold'Em

[TimTimSalabim]

[ QUOTE ]
Winning Texas Hold'Em

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like he put a lot of thought into the title, anyway.

read about half this book (not the very start that goes over rules and some other complete basics)....

frankly, i'm very impressed with the content. there are some glaring typos but the ones i've caught have been like "one of one of the reasons", pretty shocking this didn't get picked up but shouldn't affect your utility from using the book.

a few things (some fairly unique, others not but maroon writes in very strong manner)

likes the check-raise. says if you never use it, you'll become completely predictable. says at a "no check raise" home game, just play very tight in early position, very loose in late position and you'll win, i'd like to see the math on that. he says check-raise is vital but don't overuse. and he goes thru conditions on check-raise (that's what i like about miller SSHE, yao king etc. they go thru the conditions in which certain plays are possible and more important when to absolutely NOT make a play)

great stuff on continuation bluff/semi bets. not sure if they are called continuation in limit. but same principle.

pre-flop looks pretty good. lots of explanation. nothing too unique to the advice though.

short-handed looks very good. and he really lays it out that you will get run over at short-handed IF X, Y, Z. makes things very clear. i.e. don't open call in short-handed ever.

other sections look interesting but i haven't got to them.

BTW, you may notice i haven't read the book in order necessarily...

anyhow, lots of good stuff. lots of insight. and "the price was right" at indigo here in canada. if it was more expensive, it wouldn't seem worth it for size of book, but the content is worth it.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
I've only read the short-handed section so far, but it is quite good.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've read much more now (bluffing, semi-bluffing, deception) and the book is very strong. The advice seems a bit less structured than in some other books, but it is full of ideas that are correct and useful.

Despite its subtitle (". . . for players of all levels"), I think there's a fair amount in the book that beginners won't grasp very well on their first reading. Also, some of the topics that are covered (e.g., deception) just don't matter at the lowest limits.

This is definitely a more advanced book than, say, WLLHE (Jones). It's probably more at the SSHE level except that, compared to SSHE, it suffers from a lack of hand examples.

Overall, it's a good book. The advice is strong, obviously written by a winning player.

[Predator314]

I've watched and datamined many of Matt's hands. He's definitely a winning player with an outstanding win rate. I've learned a lot from Matt and have faith that this book is excellent. His site is excellent too.

He definitely plays a different game than your average 2+2'er. I've studied his play and adapted some of it to my game and it has greatly improved my winrate. Taking some of his advice and studying a bunch of his hands, I've managed to up my winrate from just over 1.5BB/100 to over 2BB/100.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the author is a winner in the mid/high limit Party games (up to 30/60 I believe) and understands the game quite well, so he's capable of writing a good book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are some gems from his website:

[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can play 30 percent of your hands and still be a winner playing full ring games.

I actually have empirical evidence that you can. And it appears that you can be just as big a winner as the 15s.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
...the 2+2ers who prop up the game and are basically as lucrative to you as any calling station...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm buying his book anyway FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've only read the short-handed section so far, but it is quite good.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've read much more now (bluffing, semi-bluffing, deception) and the book is very strong. The advice seems a bit less structured than in some other books, but it is full of ideas that are correct and useful.

Despite its subtitle (". . . for players of all levels"), I think there's a fair amount in the book that beginners won't grasp very well on their first reading. Also, some of the topics that are covered (e.g., deception) just don't matter at the lowest limits.

This is definitely a more advanced book than, say, WLLHE (Jones). It's probably more at the SSHE level except that, compared to SSHE, it suffers from a lack of hand examples.

Overall, it's a good book. The advice is strong, obviously written by a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]

maurile, good report and i concur with most of it.

i like the writing style. very easy to read.

not a basic book by any stretch. you are correct that it doesn't have very many hand examples.

matt seems to think you need the "check-raise" and even says if no one check-raises, you can basically win by playing very little up-front and lots of with good position. i wish he fleshed that out ala sklansky, miller, harrington, yao king etc. it would have been interesting, because i almost never see check-raises at low limit passive games (probably not what matt plays regularly)

very good section on shorthanded games.

i think at least 7 or 8 of the short chapters are very good, and it has some of the best stuff i've seen on certain topics. so definitely a worthwhile book.

my sense is that matt plays very high limit games (and i've read that)

[Dudd]

I picked it up, and what little I've read is fairly good. Right now I think the author is a high limit (Party 30/60 I believe), but has played lower (5/10 short for a while, I believe) extensively as a pro.

[I am fish]

I bought the book for 8$ today from B&N. I read the entire thing, and...

I thought it was pretty good overall. A lot of beginner crap, that is explained better in Theory of Poker and Small Stakes Hold'em, but the overall vibe of the book once it gets going is very good. You can tell he is a good poker player and has had his experience moving up the Party limits.

I think it's a worthy read, and that most poker players will get something good out of it. Only 8$ and a quick read.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
says at a "no check raise" home game, just play very tight in early position, very loose in late position and you'll win, i'd like to see the math on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't have any numbers, but it makes logical sense, right? If you can't checkraise, early-position players are stripped of a huge weapon.