King Yao "Weighing the Odds"

I just ordered the book today....


"there is no such thing as bad press"

[hyp]

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason, could you address Shandrax's assertion that the book is a "copycat job?" I've read TOP, HPFAP, and Yao's book and didn't see the copycatting myself. However, I've never read SSH and now wonder if I should. Will I get much more out of SSH if Yao's book is so similar?

[/ QUOTE ]


Part of the reason why it may not be obvious when people are copying TOP and HEPFAP is that almost every book is based on the fundamentals David originally set forth - some utilize said lessons correctly, others butcher them unrecognizably.

That all said, I think this book is one of the better non-2+2 books put out in the last few years.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

[Jeffage]

Well, after reading this thread I just picked it up on Amazon for 16 bucks. I would say ANY poker book that generates this type of discussion and has some interesting items that reinforce some ideas and possibly introduce new ones will be worth the price of a spicy roll combo at my local sushi joint. I'll post a review when I get into it. Has anyone seen anything in the book (besides DIPO) that they thought was incorrect advice or was the only criticism that is was derivative of other works?

I also bought, "God Wants You To Roll" which was discussed in a recent B&M thread...finally highly recommend the Stu Unger biography by Dalla...scary, page turning read.

Jeff

[NSchandler]

It certainly seems that people are being way too harsh on this book.

First, the criticism that the book reads much like many 2+2 books may be true, but it should not be considered a knock on Weighing the Odds (WTO). There is of course going to be great overlap of the material between different books, but this should be expected. Unless the author believes for some reason that his readers have all read TOP, SSHE, HFAP, etc. it would be a disservice to his readers to not include many of the same topics. And, as King Yao pointed out above, if SSHE was not even released when WTO was written, then that only furthers the point. Good advice is good advice, and good books are going to read much the same in places.

Incidentally, if there were a group of readers who read SSHE after WTO, they would probably complain that SSHE simply repeats much of what they already learned in Weighing the Odds. But of course on the 2+2 forums, the flip side of this seems to be the norm...

Second, I think there is a great deal to be learned from the book that is covered only tangentially in some other 2+2 books. The many charts and tables that show the math behind the intuition are very helpful. For example, the 2+2 books may talk about the advantage of raising for a free card, and the intuition behind how it can save you bets, etc. However, WTO goes a step further, and shows you specifically the math behind it, how the calculations differ depending on the number of outs you have, and how often your "free card play" needs to work for it to be a profitable maneuver. To say that all of this is just a restatement of what was said in SSHE is simply not true.

As another example, HFAP may speak in general terms about why playing AQ against an EP raiser can lead to trouble, but WTO goes a step further, making certain assumptions regarding the PF raiser's standards, and showing the expected equity of AQ in such a situation. It is one thing to state (correctly) that AQ can lead to trouble because you're going to be up against AA, KK, AK, etc. quite often; it is an altogether different thing to show this mathematically. To show exactly how AQ matches up against other specific hands helps you not only see the intuition that you can play AQ only against loose EP raisers, but it shows you exactly *how* loose they must be, and what range of hands is necessary, for re-raising with AQ to be a profitable move.

Many other issues seem to be fairly fresh. It is probably not immediately obvious, even to many who have read SSHE or HFAP, that T9s is better than AT *heads-up* against an EP pre-flop raiser, given certain assumptions. Even if one can mentally grasp this, seeing the mathematics behind the idea should still be helpful.

The list could go on and on, as examples of this litter the book.

To anybody who is considering this book, I would highly recommend it, as I am finding it (I've got about 100 pages left to go) to be a very valuable complement to many of the 2+2 books. I don't think that most of the posters who have been highly critical of the book have really given it a fair reading.

But that's just my 2 cents...

Very nice post. Ditto on the many tables and the math behind such plays as the raise for the free card. Those elements made a strong impression on me, even though I had read about the plays in other areas. I think you hit the nail on the head in saying WTO explains things "a step further."

[rgschackelford]

Howdy again everyone,

I bought this book on Amazon, about a month ago, and am only four chapters in. I would probably have finished it by now if it weren't for classes starting back up, and having to read about two books a week and write papers about them. Anyway, I really liked the discussion of partial outs. I have read SSHE, and I loved the partial outs discussion there, too. However, I think that it is used, but oft forgotten. Therefore, seeing it again just reinforces the ideas.

So far, I love the book. I've skipped ahead, and it looks like a wellspring of information. I anticipate picking it back up sometime after finals in December [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]. Anyway, until then, I'll just have to fall back on robbing my friends in our NL cash games we play in, unless law enforcement is reading this, in which case I won't and I don't. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Well, I see that I have gone over my personal comfort limit of emoticons in one post, so I bid you adieu.

Rusty G.

P.S. I love how on this forum the big names participate. If you want to call Greg Raymer a hack, you can call Greg Raymer a hack. But, you won't just have to answer to ChecknRaise316 or Mr. Bluffs, you might have to answer to Gregory freakin' Raymer! Awesome!

[Shandrax]

Ok, here is my "review"!

Disclaimer: I have to remind the reader that english is not my first language, so I cannot any subtle nuances to make my point.

So, here we go...

Chapter 1 - Who this book is for (p. 17)
"This book is for you if you want to think analytically and learn to become a better Limit Hold'em player"

Chapter 1 - The Evolution of the Hold'em Player
Hold'em Habilis
Hold'em Erectus
Hold'em Sapiens
Hold'em Brain

I don't know if this is a joke or not. For me this seems just ridiculous and dragging this book on the Poker for Dummies level. A scientific book should work without such flat cathegories. David Sklansky has written a much better essay on the subject in Sklansky on Poker (p. 33)

Chapter 2 - The Players
It is about different player types, profiling them and drawing conclusions, conclusions like "Against players who are observant and adjust their play based on your play, you can vary your play to keep them off guard." Really? So we should use deception, but how do we do this? Any guidelines any tricks? Game Theory maybe? Of course not!
Overall this chapter is describing the obvious with a little bit of wisdom added from the various Poker Essays by Mason Malmuth and Theory of Poker.

Chapter 3 - EV
Nothing new here. If you have Tournament Poker for Advanced Players or SSHE, you can skip this chapter entirely.

Chapter 4 - Outs
Nothing new here either. If you have Hold'em Poker or SSHE, you can skip this as well.

Chapter 5 - Pot Odds
Nothing new here....am I repeating myself? Theory of Poker and SSHE have this covered, so no need to repeat what is well known already. DIPO is an attempt to provide something unique, but unfortunately others have pointed out already, that it is rather worthless.

Chapter 6 - Position
7 pages about why having position is good in Hold'em. Don't expect anything that makes you say "Wow! I was not aware of that".

Up to that point, we have already covered 100 pages of the book, 100 down - 250 to go.

Chapter 7 - 11 (50 pages)
Another repetition of the concepts that should be familiar to everyone from Theory of Poker, HEFAP and Hold'em Poker.

Something that stuck on me was "How often should you bluff" (p. 128). The author comes to the conclusion that something like 10% may be wrong, especially if you get called all the time. Basically there is zero information except that the author doesn't know it himself. I suggest to read page 166 in Theory of Poker.

Chapter 12 - Starting Hand Selection
It starts off with card combinations and a few all-in odds. I don't know what the purpose of this is because this is about Limit Hold'em and all-in is rather rare in this scenario. Also it is well known that computer simulations can lead to questionable results. At least it ends with the conclusion that starting hands can change in value.

Next follows some sort of playbook. The recommendations differ from the classical Sklansky Hand Groupings, so it is up to reader if he wants to give it a shot or not.

Whenever I read about detailed hand recommendations I get reminded of the quote in Ace on the River: "No need to be precise when you don't even know what you are talking about".

Chapter 13-15
42 pages to cover the play from the flop to the river!

Chapter 16
20 pages on hand reading with a small excerpt from Super System on double gut shot draws.

Chapter 17-18
30 pages on shorthanded play. Lots of general advice and almost nothing on heads-up play. I guess I prefer HEFAP on this subject.

Chapter 19
20 pages on Online Poker which also fall into the cathegory of general advice.

Chapter 20
20 pages on other topics like the "Monty Hall Problem". I switch to Door 3!

Honestly, I don't know what you expect from a book, but I expect more. Maybe I am too much of a 2+2 fanboi and my standards for quality may be too high for the average mortal to meet, I can't tell. All I can say is that if you have read the major 2+2 publications, then you simply don't need this book. If your background consists of stuff like WLLHE, it could be a welcome addition to your library /shrug

I think you're being a bit harsh.

While it may not explore any "new" ground (is there any?) It does offer some different perspectives, reasonings on the important concepts we have read about before. Personally I think it ranks right up there with the best hold em' books. DIPO may be a bit of unnecessary mental gymnastics, but it is not inaccurate.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]dave

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Dave:

There actually is some new ground. I should be writing about it in our November and December Two Plus Two Internet Magazines. That's all I'll say for now.

Best wishes,
Mason

[MicroBob]

Outstanding.

very much looking forward to these articles...and glad that you are finding more of value to this book than the OP did.