Benefiting From Poker Books

[BluffTHIS!]

The thread on Barry Greenstein's book has prompted me to make this long post, although threads about other books come to mind as well. I see many criticisms of various books based on not having read the book in question and just regurgitating the thoughts of others, as well as on one unthoughtful reading. And many of the criticisms are based on parts of a book that might not benefit them, either because they don't need that specific advice, or just as likely, because they do not have an open mind to benefit to some degree when they could. And the real question is, how much do you need to benefit from a book to buy and read it? My answer is not much, as long as it is something, and as long as you can differentiate between good and bad advice in those non-2+2 books that are not totally correct. Even though I only play big bet games now, I still read most new poker books on limit that are not obvious trash by suspect writers, because if there really were enough game selection at higher limits online, I might start playing limit again, and because I am interested in any poker theory. For similar reasons, although I rarely play tourneys, I have read DS’ tourney book and both of Harrington’s. I am always looking for another good concept or two no matter where they may be found.

I aspire to be a top player and do not think I am there yet. And by top I mean in the top 5% of winning players, not just players overall. Just like in school or anything else, gaining that last bit of edge and knowledge that separates those top players from others requires a lot of reading, playing and as Mason always emphasizes, thinking about the game. Part of that knowledge edge comes from reading anything remotely worthwhile like the posts in these forums as well as books that might not even be 100% correct, again as I said above, assuming that you can tell what is not. I have gained from reading certain concepts in certain books that are widely acknowledged to have lots of incorrect information, just because some concepts there are not widely discussed anywhere else, or are thought about in a different manner (these beneficial concepts in books that contain error usually are things that do not have to do with tactical advice but with overall poker theory or playing the player). There is even a benefit from reading bad advice so that you understand why certain players who go by it play in the manner they do. And the higher stakes you play the more important it is to get into your opponents' heads and try to understand how they play, not only from a psychological point of view, but also from the point of view of poker theory that is incomplete and misapplied. If you are not able to at big bet particularly, then you won't be able to accurately read their hands and that is the key to beating those games.

And how many of you that read these forums have read all the books in Mason's reviews in GT&OT that he says all serious players should read, especially those dealing with forms not widely played now like high draw? Not many I bet. But the gain from those books again comes from concepts not discussed elsewhere plus understanding the methodologies behind determining playing standards for each round of play. Winning Poker Systems by Zadeh comes to mind. Even though there wasn't much if anything in print regarding triple draw lowball before SS2, the single draw lowball sections of that book still are instructive for TD if applied properly. Or how many of you have ever read the early classics like The Education of A Poker Player by Yardley or Oswald Jacoby on Poker? The tactical advice there is not enough to win now, although they do lay out the appropriately tight foundation that a winning player should have. In their day they were winning poker players who thought a lot about the game, and any player remotely interested in the theoretical history of poker prior to DS’ TOP should read them.

Regarding the sections of Barry's book most criticized, those dealing with self and game management, how many of you who think it is unhelpful, especially because you mainly play online, really actually thought about that content and how it might possibly help you? Do all of you really think you are vaccinated for life against any life/game leaks? Have you never seen over time as I have, very good winning players who slowly started a slide downhill both personally and bankroll-wise? If you have, then you should understand the critical importance of being able to recognize the first small signs of such problems in yourself. And playing online only, all you have to observe and go by mostly is yourself. And how many people honestly evaluate themselves in any aspect of their lives? An example of this is a recent thread in the psychology forum dealing with smoking pot and playing. A couple players there maintained they beat 10/20 limit while high. They are deluding themselves if they think that it won't negatively affect them in the long run.

Other books that deal with more psychological or game dynamics topics that I have see repeatedly criticized are Poker, Sex and Dying and Zen and The Art of Poker (I make no attempt to defend “cyclical luck” talked about in the latter). Understanding the psychological makeup of opponents beyond the 4 simple types is critical. Dr. Al in his book talks about those 4 types and says that there is really a grid with many variations, though he doesn’t go into detail about those variations like Poker, Sex and Dying. And Zen and The Art of Poker is very helpful in analyzing how game conditions can affect opponent’s actions and most particularly in the psychological stance that the true tight-aggressive player should have. But many here failed to gain anything from these two books.

As I said in my posts regarding Barry's book, it is the thought process of top players that I am most interested in reading about and applying to my own game. At higher stakes this is of vital importance when playing the player assumes as much if not more importance than making technically sound pot-driven decisions. In no-limit particularly, easily a greater part of your earn can come from winning with either no hand or with marginal hands in situations where you are able to win without showdowns. And you can't do that without thinking about the right things for that game in that particular situation with that particular player. ABC sit-and-wait poker with an occasional draw raise won't cut it. So any chance you get to read about how a top player thinks should be gladly received, even if you don't find everything helpful right at the moment. And the benefit will come from actually taking time to think about those things said, instead of hastily dismissing them. Finally, just as with advanced concepts in any field of study, the reason some people don’t benefit from certain books is that some part of the contents are in fact “over their heads”. And usually this isn’t an IQ thing either. It’s a desire to be open-minded and think deeply thing.

[Hold'me]

Excellent post! This deserves to be stickied.

[npc]

An excellent post. I agree with the majority of it.

[ QUOTE ]
And many of the criticisms are based on parts of a book that might not benefit them, either because they don't need that specific advice,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my biggest concern based on many posters' mini-reviews on this forum. Many comments on some books are of the form, "This book sucks because it didn't help me." When the reviewer isn't the target audience, this is an unfair criticism. When I review books, I always try to consider two large questions:

1) Who is the target audience for this book?
2) Does this book meet the needs of this audience?

Writing a review without this in mind doesn't serve the public very well.

[ QUOTE ]
And the real question is, how much do you need to benefit from a book to buy and read it? My answer is not much, as long as it is something, and as long as you can differentiate between good and bad advice in those non-2+2 books that are not totally correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, an additional cost involved in reading a book is the opportunity cost associated with the lost time. In my case, the cost of this time exceeds the cost of the book. Time spent reading a mediocre or bad book could be spent thinking about hands, running simulations, or reading or rereading a good book. Therefore, I believe it's worthwhile for most people to avoid the bottom half of the poker literature.

[ QUOTE ]

I am always looking for another good concept or two no matter where they may be found.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement reminds me of one other musicians would say about Jimi Hendrix. Allegedly, he'd spend a lot of time listening to other acts, even if they weren't very good. His feeling was that if he could hear or learn one good lick or change, it was worth his time. A lot of people who excel in many fields seem to have this trait in common.

[ QUOTE ]
There is even a benefit from reading bad advice so that you understand why certain players who go by it play in the manner they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite often, even in books by authors I respect, I find myself disagreeing with suggestions for playing specific examples. What's valuable to me is if the author explains why they prefer a given play. That gives me a basis for questioning my own thoughts about the game. If they don't or can't provide justification for their play, that's a good indication the book isn't worthwhile.

There are a lot of good books with good ideas that are outside the mainstream, and these are well worth reading. Frankly, I think rereading good books is probably more beneficial than reading bad or mediocre books for the first time.

Good post.

zzzzzzzz

[mosquito]

NH, sir!

The best part, it is too long and complex to benefit
the fish. lol!

Mason's reviews in GT&OT. GT&OT ?

[steamboatin]

Gambling Theory and Other Topics, a very good book.

[pipes]

I have read many of the somewhat obscure books Mason rated highly in GTAOT. These include the Game Theory book by Ankeny(sp?) and that Sleep till noon by Fox. I enjoyed both of them.

I was also one of the ones critical of Greenstein's offering. Besides for a few chapters where he goes through the play of hands and what is going through his mind, the rest of the book is complete fluff.

[Student]

I strongly agree with your contention, which I understand to be that there are jewels among those rocks! A nice thing about your approach is that one can buy practically any book about poker (or even alledged to be about poker, such as the book "Wittgenstein's Poker), and as long as the price you paid for the book is small, you'll learn something!

Hellmuth's books are damned by some and praised by others. Why? Because there are ideas that are useless to some readers, and these are focused on by some readers in their book critiques, and because there are also ideas that are unusual and powerful, which become basis for praise. Your focus on the occasional jewel to be found among the rocks is refreshing, and of use to everyone who thinks broadly about things!

Dave