"The Theory of Poker" observation/question

[NickS]

I just finished reading "The Theory of Poker" and as advertised it's a great book. I wonder if any thought has been given to a revision which would include more Hold'em examples. I realize the book was written(in 1987?) prior to the explosion in popularity of Hold'em, but I was a little disappointed that the majority of examples are Stud hands. In fact I think there were more Razz and Lowball examples than Hold'em. Plus I imagine a revised TOP would be a good maketing move. I realize we Hold'em players have HPFAP, but Stud players also have SCSFAP.

[Al Mirpuri]

The whole point of TOP is that it expounds concepts and plays that underlie all forms of poker, with the admitted exception of high-low poker, and so naturally it would draw upon all major poker variants to illustrate these points. It would go against the raison d'etre of the book to revise it and substitute Hold'em examples for those already in it.

[Oski]

why not just add more hold-em examples to compare with the razz and draw examples. Yes, the point of the book is to teach fundamental theory applicable to all forms of poker, but it may be more helpful to color it with the language most poker players speak. I think the update and remarketing of the work is enough justification from a financial standpoint, and the TOP might become more accessible to the readers. I don't see how this proposal would detract from the purpose.

[NickS]

Oski, that's exactly what I had in mind. Just add more Hold'em examples, don't take anything out that's already there. Sort of a "21st Century Edition" of TOP.

[dirty_dan]

Why bother? TOP is already regarded as a must have text. I don't think sales are going to increase because a version with more hold'em examples is available, especially at the boosted price that will have to be charged to make the effort worthwhile.

[crockpot]

Razz is chosen for many of the examples because it is much easier to read hands in that game, so it is easier to show the correct play if you know the opponent's hand. you will notice that in many of Sklansky's hold 'em examples, the opponent's hand is exposed, in order to show the correct play if you know the opponent's hole cards, consistent with the fundamental theorem.

i would like to see a few more hand reading exercies added to HEPFAP for this reason, but i see no reason to update TOP.