How far can you go if you know the book fundamentals of poker?

spurgeon · #1 06-22-2005, 04:33 PM

Let's say that you have read the hold em section of the book fundamentals of poker by Malmuth. You understand that you can never play too tight before the flop. Basically, you should only play the hands Malmuth lays out in the book. High pairs, middle pairs, small pairs, trouble hands, suited connectors, and suited aces. You should never call raises when you you will be dominated. Thus, if someone raises you will have to fold your K-J. You understand the basic odds. You need 4 to 1 odds for a flush draw. 5 to 1 odds for a open ended straight draw. 10.5 to 1 for a gut shot. You should play small pairs and suited connectors in late positon with two limpers and no raisers. If you do not flop your set with a small pair, then release it for the most part, etc. You understand the basics, but not a lot of extra advanced stuff that is spelled out in small stakes hold em. How far can you go? Break even? Beat 1-2? Beat 3-6? Beat 10-20?

benfranklin · #2 06-22-2005, 04:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Let's say that you have read the hold em section of the book fundamentals of poker by Malmuth. .....How far can you go? Break even? Beat 1-2? Beat 3-6? Beat 10-20?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't go anywhere until you start playing a lot of hands. Assume that you will lose to begin with. Playing is as much a part of your poker education as reading.

Play some hands, go back and re-read the book, and play some more. Read these forums. How far you can go with just this depends on you, how you learn, how quickly you learn, your natural style of play, etc.

But fairly soon, you are going to want to add to your library.

Niediam · #3 06-22-2005, 04:45 PM

You could probably make a small profit at online .5/1 and casino 3/6.

AKQJ10 · #4 06-22-2005, 05:15 PM

I don't know much about Malmuth's book -- AFAICT it's somewhat superceded by Miller's GSIH in the 2+2 pantheon. But from your description I'd say you know enough to beat the Foxwoods $2/4 regularly, and some soft $4/8 games. I don't have experience any higher but some of them look soft too. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

maurile · #5 06-22-2005, 06:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let's say that you have read the hold em section of the book fundamentals of poker by Malmuth. .....How far can you go? Break even? Beat 1-2? Beat 3-6? Beat 10-20?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't go anywhere until you start playing a lot of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, let's say that in addition to the Group 1 and Group 2 hands, you also start playing some suited 2-gappers.

Then how far could you go?

maurile · #6 06-22-2005, 06:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How far can you go? Break even? Beat 1-2? Beat 3-6? Beat 10-20?

[/ QUOTE ]
With just the simple fundamentals you mentioned, I think you could profitably multi-table the Party 2/4 game.

npc · #7 06-22-2005, 08:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Okay, let's say that in addition to the Group 1 and Group 2 hands, you also start playing some suited 2-gappers.

Then how far could you go?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the wrong way to think about it. Your results won't get appreciably better by adding or subtracting groups of hands. Your results will get better as you start to recognize situations and react to them properly. Books can expedite this process and help keep you from blind alleys, but they can't completely replace experience. Poker is too vast for every situation to be coverable in print. Moreover, even if books did cover every situation you wouldn't remember them all.

It's like everything worth doing. You get better fastest through a combination of study and experience, but one without the other doesn't get you nearly as far.

npc · #8 06-22-2005, 08:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Let's say that you have read the hold em section of the book fundamentals of poker by Malmuth. How far can you go? Break even? Beat 1-2? Beat 3-6? Beat 10-20?

[/ QUOTE ]

A number of people have given answers to your question, but I find them to be unsatisfying. It sounds like you have a pretty good, solid, basic foundation. This is a good thing. However, whether you could be a winner or not depends at least as much on your ability to make generally good decisions at the table. I don't know if you can do this or not.

Based on what you've said, I think it would be easiest for you to beat the online games. I think you have a solid shot at, say, 2-4 B&M games with typical weak competition. I think you'd probably do well in a 9 or 10 handed home game without a rake. Remember, though, that in the casinos you have to beat the other players, the rake, and tips. A lot of money gets taken off the tables over time compared with stack sizes in these games.

Back to your question, none of us really know. But, it sounds like you have a good foundation. The next steps should be to gain some inexpensive experience and continue your studies. This is the path to being a winning poker player. How long it will take you to get there, I can't say.

maurile · #9 06-22-2005, 09:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This is the wrong way to think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please read my post (and benfranklin's) again and tell me you get my joke.

Jordan Olsommer · #10 06-22-2005, 10:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Okay, let's say that in addition to the Group 1 and Group 2 hands, you also start playing some suited 2-gappers.

Then how far could you go?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the wrong way to think about it. Your results won't get appreciably better by adding or subtracting groups of hands. Your results will get better as you start to recognize situations and react to them properly. Books can expedite this process and help keep you from blind alleys, but they can't completely replace experience. Poker is too vast for every situation to be coverable in print. Moreover, even if books did cover every situation you wouldn't remember them all.

It's like everything worth doing. You get better fastest through a combination of study and experience, but one without the other doesn't get you nearly as far.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ow - hook, line, and sinker. That's gotta hurt.