Mike Cappelletti's New Book

[Big Dave D]

Has anyone any thoughts on his new book,"How to Win at Omaha High-Low Poker"? It seems to have some strange advice, imho.

cheers

Dave

[jedi]

Cappeletti is a strange man. That having been said, I just ordered the book. I'll let you know what I think when I get it.

[jedi]

I'm not ignoring this post, but I just got the book in finally. Just taking a look at the table of contents is overwhelming. It looks like Cappeletti has a lot to say about the game, much more than the other Omaha books I've read (Ken Warren, Hellmuth's section in his book).

If you think the advice is strange (and I probably will to), the thing to remember is that it's mostly a guideline. I expect the book to point things out that I never knew, or never thought to consider in Omaha. It should change my game, but hopefully it won't turn me into a robot.

[Big Dave D]

I'v also just got it...I'm gonna wait until after Christmas to gt stuck in. First thoughts tho...some strange advice, such as playing 30% of hands UTG. And some of the hand examples have that terribly contrived feel about them that you sometimes get too. Let's compare notes in the NY!

cheers

Dave

[jedi]

One thing I will mention is that I'm only through about 60 pages of it so far, and it's FILLED with material. It's got lots of stuff. I don't completely understand all the charts yet, but I'll get there. There's lots to look at and he gives many situations and stuff.

[DPCondit]

I recently picked up his book, and Krieger/Tenner's new book as well. That said I seem to be taking my time with both of them.

Preliminary impressions of Capilletti's book:

1. It appears to be chock full of interesting strategies and tables.
2. The starting hand requirements are too loose IMHO (except perhaps for unusually loose and passive games). That is not a commentary on his other advice, which I have mostly not read yet.

Don

[DPCondit]

To be fair, his advice is directed to "Rule" games, which are defined as 5 or more callers on average in an 11 handed game (in Los Angeles we generally have 9 handed games, and usually someone is in the bathroom or taking a cigarette break, on Party Poker it is 10 handed, and on Poker Stars it is 9 handed. I'm not sure where they play 11 handed, but I have seen it in Laughlin). Anyways, I still think his advice (starting hands) is a bit loose even with 5 people seeing the flop, but probably not where 6 or 7 people are seeing the flop.

He does advocate playing marginal hands to help generate more action on future hands, which I generally agree with. However, in my opinion, marginal hands should be at least break-even, or really darn close, and I think some of these hands are a little "south" of the line. A specific example, 4 cards 9 or higher is a money-loser, IMHO, and is less than marginal (except in very loose games, 5 callers doesn't qualify in my opinion).

Just my opinion,
Don

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Dave:

I haven't read this book but I just finished reading Poker at the Mellenium by caro and Cappeletti the majority of which is written by capelletti and which is half on hold 'em and half on Cappelletti. So let me put it this way. After deciphering what cappelletti writes, I would hate to have to do it again on another book.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Big Dave D]

Ok, as it was the Christmas season I treated myself to a triumvirate of Hilo terror – the Cloutier book, the new Cappelletti and the Tenner/Krieger collaboration. The reason for this was that I felt that my game had got a little stale and any new ideas, even only one per book would be welcome (disclaimer: I only play online in the Mid-Large Omaha games on Party/Stars.)

The Cloutier book was surprisingly harmless. The actual limit hilo sections are very short, but there was no glaringly bad advice and if I was a complete newbie then this would have been an okay, if a trifle expensive, intro to the game.

Unfortunately I have to report that although the volume of the Capelletti book was high, in that the whole book was dedicated to limit hilo, I felt that the book was truly terrible. The structure of the book was poor, with no real progression of ideas and it gave me the suspicion that it was cobbled together from bastardized versions of his articles. He had many hand examples but most of these were contrived and often he would describe the hand, then say at the end that maybe playing it wasn't such a good idea after all. My favourite of this ilk was a hand where he described “checking, intending to pass to any bet” then when there was a bet and some callers he “decides to take one off”! Worse yet,some of his advice, imho, was plain wrong. For example, he advocates betting into a large, loose field with just a nut low draw, no high. He also suggests playing mixed bag hands and even raising with them for deception purposes, against a field which he has predefined as loose anyway. I can honestly state that I got not one useful idea out of the whole book.

Thankfully, the Tenner book was a completely different kettle of fish and was absolutely excellent. Well structured, no glaring errors, great hand selection advice and tons of “how to“ detail. There was also some useful sections on the psychology of the game and tilt, which is insidious and a major danger in Omaha and nice to see covered off. The is probably the definitive guide to loose style Omaha.

Gl

Dave

[Iceman]

"Has anyone any thoughts on his new book,"How to Win at Omaha High-Low Poker"? It seems to have some strange advice, imho."

Ray Zee's book is all you need for Omaha-8. Don't waste money on anything else for that game.