[Savior17]

I got through the first 80 pages and read it slowly because I thought there might be something in the fundamentals that would be profound or contrary to popular belief or what was previously written. Obviously it is not the case and it did nothing else, but substantiate the way I play now.

I'm in for a discussion and should be through more of the book this weekend.
S

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by Savior17

I got through the first 80 pages and read it slowly because I thought there might be something in the fundamentals that would be profound or contrary to popular belief or what was previously written. Obviously it is not the case and it did nothing else, but substantiate the way I play now.

I'm in for a discussion and should be through more of the book this weekend.
S

I'm finding this as well... nothing in the first two sections of this book has been new or particularly ground-breaking. It's basically stuff that I knew already just written in a book. Like, yeah, I know (as an aspiring professional reading a book about playing professional poker) that if someone goes all in for $25 more in a $500 pot, I should call with just about anything, but fold if they went all in for $5000 more (assuming I had some medium strength hand where I didn't know what to do). This was all covered in Small Stakes Hold'em, NLHETAP, etc. I'm hoping sections 3-5 will have some stuff that hasn't been talked about before.

[Clipper]

Those were good comments about the "big hand for a big pot" concept. That does not scratch the surface though. I think that one of the most important skill to winning is to know when that top pair (or other moderate strength hand) is worth playing a big pot. It comes down to knowing your player. On one extreme, when a very tight player moves in on you, you just about have to fold that top pair. On the other extreme, I was playing a couple of weeks ago with a drunk, crazy maniac who you simply had to call an all-in with top pair - no matter what your kicker. I saw him lose several hundred dollars with failed bluffs, allins with middle pair, etc. It felt like, "well, I know I am supposed to fold - by the book - but no way I am folding against this guy". Most of the time, the situation is somewhere in between. Also depends much on your stack size. If you have a big stack (say 100x BB) in cash game or tourney, you will fold top pair to a big raise or reraise more often than if you are playing 25xBB

[Clipper]

Yet another key variable: what does your opponent think of you. I am know to be a fairly tight player, so I have to call-down more bluffs than a loose player would. At times I just have a 6th sense that this guys is bluffing. Usually, it is when the betting pattern does not add up, or a big bet seems to come out of nowhere (or if the raise was excessive).

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by Clipper

Those were good comments about the "big hand for a big pot" concept. That does not scratch the surface though. I think that one of the most important skill to winning is to know when that top pair (or other moderate strength hand) is worth playing a big pot. It comes down to knowing your player. On one extreme, when a very tight player moves in on you, you just about have to fold that top pair. On the other extreme, I was playing a couple of weeks ago with a drunk, crazy maniac who you simply had to call an all-in with top pair - no matter what your kicker. I saw him lose several hundred dollars with failed bluffs, allins with middle pair, etc. It felt like, "well, I know I am supposed to fold - by the book - but no way I am folding against this guy". Most of the time, the situation is somewhere in between. Also depends much on your stack size. If you have a big stack (say 100x BB) in cash game or tourney, you will fold top pair to a big raise or reraise more often than if you are playing 25xBB

This is exactly what I mean. NL cash games are all about knowing when it's +EV to put all of your money in. When players move from tournaments to cash games, they get crushed because AK on a K82 flop just isn't as strong, and they constantly pay off sets. Some players never figure out when their hand is bad (I still stack off occasionally with TPTK). This book is not going to help them do that, in my opinion. So far, it has just laid the groundwork for what to do AFTER you've decided whether or not you're committed, but there really isn't any information about how to make this determination, except in really obvious cases where the pot is huge compared to the stacks.

So, I think a lot of inexperienced players will read this and misapply a lot of it... getting committed to pots when they shouldn't be and stacking off with lots of crap.

[Clipper]

Another point. I highly respect TJ Cloutier's wisdom. Especially about folding when you just know you are beat. Sometimes I even reluctantly fold TPTK even when getting 3-1 or 4-1 pot odds to call the last bet (or raise). I have just called down too many times in the past when I knew I was behind. If I call off $40 (knowing I am beat), there a couple of hours worth of profit. If you put yourself in the shoes of the raiser, you realize that he put you in a spot to where you almost have to call - say if he checkraises you allin on turn and pot is laying you 4-1 or something to call. If that little voice says fold, you should fold. I imagine Miller would have you calling based on pot odds. But usually you are beat, that is all there is to it. You should look at folding and saving the $40 as making $40.

The 2+2 community posters seem to redicule T.J. But the more I go back and study his ideas, and the longer I play, I realize that he does know a thing or two about poker. TJ is very cautious about avoiding traps. There is merrit to "not going broke in a nothing pot" and being overly cautious of a set when you bet and get called in 2 places and middle cards come - say J89 or something. You can almost smell a set out against you. You just have to slow down with your big pair; afterall you have little invested in the pot.

I am looking forward to reading the new book. Ed Miller is a poker genius. There is some very good material in his beginner holdem book and Small stakes that many players in bigger games do not even comprehend. It should be a good series of books.

[yeltzen]

Alright, I'm through part 3. I understand that parts 4 and 5 are the real focus of the book, but so far I'm pretty disappointed. The book is called PROFESSIONAL No Limit Hold'em, but there is very little advanced stuff in the book. If you've played in NL cash games for any reasonable amount of time, you know this stuff already. Like, I know I'm not supposed to semi-raise bluff with weak draws. I know I'm supposed to put players on a range of hands. I know I'm supposed to consider my odds. I'm not even an aspiring pro. So why is this stuff in a book for aspiring pros? Hmm...

[EasilyFound]

Have you gotten to the part or parts of the book that discuss when you are pot committed? Stack to pot ratios? I think that is the part that I'm interested in reading. What part in the book discusses this?

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by EasilyFound

Have you gotten to the part or parts of the book that discuss when you are pot committed? Stack to pot ratios? I think that is the part that I'm interested in reading. What part in the book discusses this?

That is part 4, which I'm reading now. This is another thing that the average player is going to misapply... telling these players that they should be ready to commit after 1/9 of their stack is in the pot is like giving a pyro a flamethrower and telling them not to use it. If you don't have a solid idea of what they're talking about and how to apply it, this kind of stuff could get you killed. ZOMG I HAVE A8 FLOP IS 8 7 2 I HAVE 1/9 IN I AM READY TO COMMITT!!!

[yeltzen]

Okay, so unless there are objections (i.e. someone really wants to go over the Basics section), we could start on the Fundamentals section, or even the REM section if people really feel like Fundamentals was just a rehash of what was discussed in NLHETAP. We can start whenever, I know a lot of people don't have the book yet.