Your thoughts on Super System

Here's a brief bio on my poker reading:

I started with Winner's Guide to Texas Holdem by Warren. Then I bought Super System II and read it. I didn't like Brunson's style. It seemed wacky.

Then I picked up Killer Online Poker (terrible book, don't waste your money). Then read Internet Texas Holdem by Hilger (liked it, but it was still a little lacking in clarity for me).

Then I went to Sklansky. I started with Holdem for Advanced players, and then read Small Stakes Holdem (this is backwards, I know). Sklansky's books, as most here can testify, are great, and they greatly improved my game.

Recently I picked Super System II back up and started rereading the NL holdem by Brunson. Strangly, now that I've read Sklansky, Super System makes more sense. I'm starting to get what Brunson was getting at. It's as though I needed Sklansky first to understand the fundamentals of poker in order to provide the context in which to understand Super System.

What is everone else's opinion of Super System. Is it helpful, or do you avoid it?

[defence18]

I found a similar situation. I read S/S and felt like I was just clinging on to bare life. Then I read a few others, then back to S/S and it was like I saw the light. So I definately get what you're saying. As for usefulness, I'd say that Doyle makes a lot of interesting points, but you need to kind of pick and choose what works for you. I think that if you follow that style to a 't' without a huge bankroll, you may be in trouble. For me, that style is a little too wreckless, so there are somethings that I use, but others I don't. I've played against people who use it, and it is very difficult to play against.

[ackid]

Super System was one of the first poker books I read. At the time I was really into 7 card stud and didnt even play holdem that much. The chapter on 7/stud was good for a basic understanding of the game. As was the limit holdem section. But the problem with SS is the material is really dated, they talk about a totally different blind structure and the games back then were not as aggressive as they are today.
The Ken Warren books are crap. He takes too much of a weak/tight approach to the game. With the "Killer Poker" books Vorhaus has some intresting insights into the game. I read The handbook for winners and that had some cool ideas and his writing style is very entertaining. The Matt Higer book read too much like a high school history book. It had alot of info but it was hard to take it in.

Cant go wrong w/ Sklansky. Just keep reading and re-reading SSHE/HEFAP. These are the best books on the market today on the subject of Hold em, IMO.

[SoftcoreRevolt]

I'd say the Super System provides a good introduction to each game with content stripped down due to the fact it is not an entire book. Plus the advice is not written directly for small stakes.

IE: The Limit Chapter of SS2 doesn't give you anything that HEPFAP is lacking. The NL section is completely worthless content for a brand new book, and most of the other games are presented in basic terms.

I'd never read the Super System before I read a better book made for a specific game.