King Yao "Weighing the Odds"

[Shandrax]

This book has received a certain type of hype on this board, but the reasons for that are beyond me.

I received my copy today and I am very disappointed. This is one of the books that will go right into the shelf, never to be opened again. Now why is that?

Well, it is a 100% copycat job. The author took SSHE, TOP and HEFAP and paraphrased it all together into a new book which has zero new content to offer.

$24.95 right down the drain. Thank you!

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Shandrax:

I just happen to be reading this book right now. I'm done with the first 100 pages, and while my opinion so far is better than yours because his analysis of some situations is pretty good, I do tend to agree with you.

Also, I feel his DIPO method is essentially worthless. While it's accurate, all it does is add needless calculations that would be very difficult to do at the table for most people. I just like to say something like "I'm getting 7-to-1 on a 5-to-1 shot, therefore I'm playing." DIPO appears to essentially do this, but then it does additional calculation involving good cards and bad cards, which to me is a complete waste.

best wishes,
Mason

[King Yao]

[ QUOTE ]
I received my copy today and I am very disappointed. This is one of the books that will go right into the shelf, never to be opened again. Now why is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

It saddens me to see that someone did not enjoy the book or think it was worth the price. I understand that not all books are going to work out for everyone, and I'm sure there are others that feel the same way you do who has not made it known. I put a lot of time and work into the book, so it is disappointing to me to see anyone that was disappointed by my work.

I'm not sure how to respond. An apology doesn't seem right. A "I'll try to do better next time" doesn't feel right either, especially since you are unlikely to purchase any potential future work from me [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]. Although I commend Barry Greenstein for essentially making a money-back guarantee on his book, I don't think that's something that is appropriate for me.

So I guess all I can respond to your post is just to acklnowledge it.


[ QUOTE ]
Well, it is a 100% copycat job. The author took SSHE, TOP and HEFAP and paraphrased it all together into a new book which has zero new content to offer.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are of course within your rights to criticize my book in any way, but please keep in mind that SSHE was yet to be published during the writing of my book. I'm not going to try to defend my work with regards to your comment, but just trying to get that one little fact straight.

King

king yao, i've read parts of your book and will be purchasing it shortly.

the one thing i would point out to detractors is that you have alot of shorthanded content in your book, and i believe that SSHE has none and HEFAP is more focused on heads-up and personally i think HEFAP's stuff relates to very high level play and/or the way poker was played before all the aggressive players (including the few good ones).

i have very much enjoyed the stuff i've read.

if someone wanted to make a generic point, the market is awash with poker books and to suggest the book should be mostly unique is unrealistic. i think if you can get 3-4 good "new" ideas (or really pounded home a point) from the book, then it's incredibly worthwhile.

[Hellmouth]

[ QUOTE ]
king yao, i've read parts of your book and will be purchasing it shortly.

the one thing i would point out to detractors is that you have alot of shorthanded content in your book, and i believe that SSHE has none and HEFAP is more focused on heads-up and personally i think HEFAP's stuff relates to very high level play and/or the way poker was played before all the aggressive players (including the few good ones).

i have very much enjoyed the stuff i've read.

if someone wanted to make a generic point, the market is awash with poker books and to suggest the book should be mostly unique is unrealistic. i think if you can get 3-4 good "new" ideas (or really pounded home a point) from the book, then it's incredibly worthwhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm actually reading it right now. I bought it a few weeks ago but got sidetracked by HOH v's 1-2. Here is my take so far.

I'm tired of reading SSHE. Ive read it 4 times. I need a new way of looking at the same material to improve my game. Thats why I bought Weighing the Odds (WTOIH). I have seen some new ideas already and am only 65 pages into the book (although I have flipped around as well).

The book is bound to have some similar structure to SSHE and HEFAP since it is only logical to start at the preflop hand selection and move forward in order.

Take it for what its worth but these days there are so many poker books with bad weak tight advice out there that any book that gives a proper strategy and solid advice is a good one in my thinking.

Ill post a full review when Im done.

Greg

[Shandrax]

[ QUOTE ]
You are of course within your rights to criticize my book in any way, but please keep in mind that SSHE was yet to be published during the writing of my book. I'm not going to try to defend my work with regards to your comment, but just trying to get that one little fact straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it is obvious that I can't tell what sort of information was available to you while you were writing this book, that's something only you know for yourself.

What I can say though is that this book created a huge Deja Vu-effect on me. For some reason I have the feeling that I have seen and read it all before.

Now there is no doubt about the fact that poker knowledge and wisdom is somewhat limited by the subject and that all books have something in common after all. Still I felt in this case it was so obvious, so that it is ok to share my impression with the public.

[uuDevil]

I agree about DIPO. However, some people do prefer it. I think the material after the pot odds discussion is much better.

It's hard to see how any good poker book could be written that wouldn't be in some way derivative of TOP. I thought Yao's effort was very good. I hope you'll let us know what you think when you've finished it.

[amulet]

i posted this before, but feel it appropriate to post it again here.

this book is good. it is not in a class with TOP, HPFAP, AND SSH, but it is more then worth your time. there is little new in the book, and while i feel the books mentioned above are clearer in their explanations of most concepts, i still enjoyed this book. i also feel strongly, that rereading important concepts is good for most people's poker. and king has written a book that i feel is solid and worth your time and money.

Weighing the Odds in Hold'em is a considerably better book than Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players.

[amulet]

"better book" is interesting wording. HPFAP covers less topics, but it covers them more comprehensively. Sklansky and Malmuth are better writers, and better at explaining the topics covered. However, you would need to add a few additionally Sklansky books to cover all the material in Weighing the Odds. I recommend and liked Weighing the Odds, I just think it offers little new, and it not as comprehensive when it covers a topic or as clear as other books are.

I suggest ALL of the following books, they are all terrific, in no particular order:
The Theory of Poker
Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players
Small Stakes Hold 'em
Harrington on Hold 'em Volume I
Harrington on Hold'em Volume II
Seven Card Stud for Advanced Players
High-Low Split Poker, Seven Card Stud and Omaha Eight or Better for Advanced Players
Sklansky on Poker
Gambling Theory and Other Topics
Getting the Best of It
Inside the Poker Mind
Middle Limit Holdem
Poker Esasys I
Poker Esasys II
Poker Eassys III
Tournament Poker for Advanced Players

I left Weighing the odds off the list, because it is just not well enough written or thorough enough in some of the topics covered.