Looking at "Fifth Street" through a fish-eye lens

[Jesse Richman]

I just finished reading Jim McManus' tremendous book "Positively Fifth Street." I'm not sure how many of you have had a chance to check it out yet, but aside from being a fantastically written, compelling piece of poker lit, it's also a truly in-depth, revealing diary of fish psychology.

McManus isn't the worst player ever, but he's certainly not a winning player, at least not from the hands he relates in the book. But I found it highly interesting to see how he justified (or, often, was unable to come up with a justification) for his play. It seems like, on one level, he acknowledges making the wrong plays over and over, and yet on another level he revels in the success he feels his play has brought him.

I don't have any specifics to bring up here, as I don't have my book with me (I plan on rereading the poker sections a couple times regardless), but I'd love to see your thoughts, either general or on specific situations.