Flawed Two Plus Two Advice

[Al Mirpuri]

I want to know how much of Two Plus Two's poker advice (whether written by SM&Z, alone or in collaboration, or others) is thought to be flawed, mistaken or wrong.

Yes, I am aware that Two Plus Two authors are the best poker theorists currently working but are they always right? Methinks not.

[Al Mirpuri]

I voted that something like 2.1% to 5% of Two Plus Two poker advice is wrong.

It should be noted that I am not talking about instances where Two Plus Two have corrected themselves, eg MM did not think low limit HE was really any different than the HE that HEFAP addressed and said as much in print in one of the Poker Essays books but he has since published Small Stakes Hold'em and so he must now believe that that low limit HE plays differently enough to publish a book devoted exclusivelty to the type of games found there: loose aggressive.

[Al Mirpuri]

Obviously, there can be no real scientific quantification of how much incorrect material there is in Two Plus Two's printed advice via an opinion poll but this poll will quantify the attitude of forum users to the material Two Plus Two puts in the public realm.

[BarronVangorToth]

It is illogical to think that everything any of them has written about is always perfectly accurate.

While the percentage is small, I'd assume most would agree that it is very likely that a fraction of 1% of their advice is incorrect -- and probably VERY close to 1/10 of 1%, if not even less than that.

When your average poker writer might be right 90% of the time, that makes 2+2 writers 100x's more accurate in my book.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[johnnybeef]

2+2 is excellent at getting the strategy/mathematical side of the game in print. i don't feel that they adress enough of the intangibles like someone like bob ciaffone or roy cooke does.

[Beach-Whale]

I have no idea how much of "2+2 advice" that might be erroneous in some way - I'm just not a good enough player or teoretician yet to spot errors with any confidence (except extremely simple ones, like the 52s error) - but what I don't like is the attitude that they are somehow infallable.

This attitude seems dangerous to me, especially when "followers" take it to heart, and just accept everything without questioning or thinking things through on their own.

I'm not sure of anything, until I have convinced myself of it through some kind of understanding. Most of the time, 2+2 books have miserably failed to give me the kind of understanding that I am looking for and can feel comfortable with. Maybe it is because I am not smart enough, maybe it is because I have high standards for what I call understanding, and maybe it is because 2+2 books often could be much better written. I genuinely think that it is a combination of all those three reasons.

I have seen them say that even a small percentage of erroneous advice in a poker book can be very detrimental. Well, I dare to say that poorly presented information can have that same, or at least similar, effect. This (poorly presented information) is in my view probably a much bigger issue with 2+2 books than straight out erroneous information.

But, they might be working on it, because SSH seems much better than eg HPFAP.

[RollaJ]

I think some of it may be flawed just based on how the game has evolved since the books were published......... That being said , I dont fully agree with the preflop play of most group 6-8 hands in HPFAP..... many of those are too weak for me even first in on the button

[PhatPots]

I think that two plus two advice is generally correct. Most of the player authors play higher stakes, so their perspective on the game is somewhat different. I agree also that they focus on the mathematical point without putting enough emphasis on the other factors of the game. Although the mathematics is key, it is not the only factor.

Cheers,
Pots

[That guy]

I would have to agree that HPFAP is not presented well. It makes excellent technical points but it is very poorly organized which makes it very difficult to read. On the other hand, The Theory of Poker and SSH are very pleasant reads.

I like the format of Ciaffones books and hope 2+2 can do something similar to Middle Limit Hold Em. 'Improve Your Poker' is a real nice read too.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi PhatPots:

Have you read The Psychology of Poker and/or Inside the Poker Mind?

Best wishes,
Mason