OT-TJ Cloutier's book

ok im just after reading his tourney book with Tom Mcvoy and i though it was rubbish.
is it just me or does any one agree that there is no way he could have had the success he did .playing like he says in the book. its sooooo weak weak weak tight.
i mean it gets worse as the book goes on.
the AK advice to just fold after the flop no matter what...
the AA advice and the "you never go broke if you limp with AA"...
the PP making a set on the flop advice: if you have 44 and the flop is K J 4 be careful ,some one may have KK...
i mean where do i stop.
i think he tries to teach a risk free method of not only reaching the final table ,but also winning tourneys but it just cant happen that way.
wouldnt not be so simple if that was through ,fold fold fold and play only AA and maybe KK...
also and the end the "practice hands" ,the examples he gives are like:

you have AQ the blinds are 400/800 some one raises to 1500 ,what should you do?
i mean compare this to one of the examples given in HOH ,the level of detail given there is really excellent.
Because he tries to teach that all that info is what makes a hand and not just the cards.
what do you all think?

[zgall1]

I am pretty sure that this has been discussed before. Everyone agrees that TJ does not use the style advocated in the book as it is extremely weak-tight and we all know he does not play that way. It is a book for extreme beginners and many would say it even does them a disservice.

I agree with everything you said. I am only recently trying to get away from playing weak tight. I can honestly say that in my short 6 month on-line experience that i did make 5 final tables using that weak tight thinking. Now that I have forgone that way, i have not reached a final table, but I am still tweaking my game and obviously somewhat drastically from my original style of play. The weak tight play he suggests only works if you get the cards and as we all know even when we get the cards the well runs dry far too often. This weak tight was recommended highly to me for beginners and I have to say I would recommend it ONLY for beginners because you just can not afford the bankroll swings being aggressive (or just loose) when you do not have the experience or skill. I know i'm rambling, but I just wanted to say I am always eager to improve my game and get beyond the weak tight thinking he recommends, that's one of the reason I lurk here at 2 + 2. I think your analysis is dead on.

[illegit]

The book is trash but it's good to own so you can lend it out to all the players in your home game. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Kirkrrr]

For the most part, like everyone already said, the book is trash. If there's one lesson I did take away from it at the time, is that don't get married to your overcards. It's obvious but I'm amazed at seeing it over and over again.

Kirk

[Cactus Jack]

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step."

How hard is it to take that first step? Think of where you were when you began. Did you know anything about starting hands? Did you know how to play beyond the basic rules? How much better are you now than you were at that first step, or a thousand steps?

It's easy to knock the book from where you are now. But when you were a beginner, it would have helped you a great deal. It did me. For its time, it was the best out there. Harrington really raised the bar.

CJ