Middle Limit Poker

[RollaJ]

I bought Middle Limit Holdem a few months ago, but due to all the speculation of there being bad advice, and even a reprinting being discussed by the authors, I am wondering if it is even worth reading. Any thoughts?

Will the publisher issue an exchange for the "correct" version?

[Mike Gallo]

I bought Middle Limit Holdem a few months ago, but due to all the speculation of there being bad advice, and even a reprinting being discussed by the authors, I am wondering if it is even worth reading. Any thoughts?

Yes, if you bought it, you might as well read it. I think the authors do bring up some good points and do give some good information.

Michael

[mchilger]

From what I understand, the reprint is mainly to fix wording, typos, etc. In one of Ciaffone's articles in Card Player, he indicated that they did not change any of their "answers" to some of the problems, but they may have expanded on the explanations.

The book is a good tool for players who know how to think through all possibilities in a given hand. You don't have to agree with the author's answers all the time, but reading the book gives you a good idea to all the possibilities you ought to consider. Like any poker book, don't take every word as carved in stone, but this book can help you think better at the poker table.

Best of luck, Matthew

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't have to agree with the author's answers all the time, but reading the book gives you a good idea to all the possibilities you ought to consider.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. If you read it along with some of the discussions of it in the archives here, it should be a valuable resource. I think those discussions have emphasized, for example, that while a lot of the recommended plays are fine as a baseline against opps who don't know your play, fewer folds would be indicated against a lineup that's familiar with and adjusting to you.

The book is unique in the large volume of example hands which allow you to consider what your play would be, then compare it to the authors' recommendation. When your play and theirs differ, their argument may or may not change your mind, but you can learn from the process of analysis in either case.

[Vehn]

I think it would have been a great book if it was titled "low limit holdem poker".

[Miah]

asked Ciaffone if I should pick up the new version since I too have the original and he said it's not worth it, that they're basically the same book only with some minor changes in the latter.

As for being a low limit book, you'll really do horrible playing this way in a low limit game. I also think the book is very good for pushing so many points across in a consise manner.

Rollaj, do you play with the same people every saturday night in your 10-20 at the Taj? What about online? I'm sure there are many out there who do, but they're also pros that play every day in the same game, and if they are winners they already know that playing the same way all the time against the same people isn't the method they need to employ in order to keep winning.

Needless to say, I'm a big fan of the book and I've seen the improvements in my game especially in places where I would have not folded in the past/continued with certain draws. You also have to realize that this book was written with somewhat of an "average" weak-tight opponent in mind, you must, as always, make changes in your play based upon your opponent(s)

Read the book yourself and then make your own assessment, as others have already stated its definitely worth a read.

[skp]

I don't think that anyone has said that the book contains "bad advice". In fact, I would say that the book is a "must read'. I agree with what John posted.

[NickS]

Use the "Search" option to find the discussion of this book back in late May and early June. It touched off some real fireworks, and there's a couple of posts by Mason as part of the discussion.

[onegymrat]

Rollaj,
Though I stay mainly in the 6-12 & 8-16 limits, I found the book to be extremely helpful. My rollercoaster sessions turned into nine winning sessions in a row after reading the book. (The 10th was not so lucky [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]) You will find that the 400+ hand examples are not a hassle to read at all. I was surprised to find so many sample hands that related to previous hands I had played, and how wrong I was. The explanations for pot odds, implied odds, etc. did not feel like a calculus class like some books, and were easy to understand. This is a must read.

The authors do emphasis frequently that their advice is aimed at the "typical" middle limit opponent, not the tricky or expert players. They recommend that you do need to adjust your play when you come across them. It seems some players knock the book and criticize their style of play. But again remember, the authors' intention is to educate you on reading the many complexities that come with various hands, and advise that you adjust and play them with your own style. Good luck.

P.S. And also what John Feeney eloquently said...

[anatta]

I love that book. I read it last year and I haven't had a losing month from 8-16 to 20-40 since last November. It was instrumental in my poker education. I totally agree that in its emphasis on the number of opponents and the board, the questions WHO RAISED? WHAT DOES HE THINK ABOUT YOUR PLAY? are often more important so these types of examples can be misleading to inexperienced players.

That said, much of the book is genius. I particularly like the way its organized, and this helped me structure my study of Poker. Like John Feeney's book says, there isn't a Poker University, you are free to learn poker the way you please. The book helped me think about Holdem in terms of i.e. "Flop Play: Overcards, top pair/overpair, drawing hands, other hand, etc." So that when I save a post or think of an idea, I can save it on Word under that section of my outline. Maybe this is obvious to some, but it helped me.

So yes, I think you should read it.