Which book do you guys recomend?

Im thinking about buying a book about poker, for learning and of general overall intrest in pokertheory. Ive read "winning low limit holdem" but now Im looking for a book about no limit. I have been playing no limit for some time now and i know the basics so i dont need a real beginners book.

Ive heard that "holdem for advanced players" by Sklansky and Malmuth is supposed to be really good. Help me out and give me some advice! Thanks!

Whatever you do... don't buy: Ken Warren Teaches Texas Hold'em.
big mistake i did.
btw, i've read sklansky and malmuth books without buying it... figure it out.

Also, could anyone recommend the best book from the PS FPP store?

Small Stakes Hold'em by Ed Miller & Sklansky & Malmuth for Limit
Theory of Poker by Sklansky for eeeverything

Too bad FPP Store doesn't have Harrington on Hold'em Vol.1 and Vol.2 (those are prolly the best for NL).

And HEPFAP (Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players by Sklansky) is for LIMIT poker. And includes stuff that's mostly useful in mid-high and high-stakes Limit so... Low limit, you can probably do without. Miller's book doesn't address short-handed play though, but HEPFAP one isn't that big of a section either. You can get plenty of info about short-handed limit from 2+2 articles. Buka.

DarkXprT, how's that readin' thing working out for ye?

oxy's super duper system

Harrington on Holdem is the best poker book ever written. You wont really learn TOO much from books but this one will teach you how to analyze situations properly and thats all that matters in poker. Once you learn to properly analyze situations you will be a winning player at any stakes.

As far as I'm concerened every other book is a complete peice of shit and waste of time ( beleive me, I own about 16 diff poker books )

don't read books

just play

read some archived posts on here or w/e if you have to

if you have to read a book probably TOP by sklansky but you may or may not understand any of it

On February 21 2006 17:02 Muhweli wrote: DarkXprT, how's that readin' thing working out for ye?

well, its working... it could seem very unbelievable but i do understand alot of NL theory, sadly i can't afford to play the stakes where that knownledge could be usefull.

Harrington on Hold'Em is golden stuff.... Super System is nice for a lot of the other games too

On February 21 2006 21:13 WGT)DarkXprT wrote: Show nested quote + On February 21 2006 17:02 Muhweli wrote: DarkXprT, how's that readin' thing working out for ye? well, its working... it could seem very unbelievable but i do understand alot of NL theory, sadly i can't afford to play the stakes where that knownledge could be usefull.

so you don't play poker?

last time i checked NL theory can be applied to any and all stakes

yeah darkxprt, it won't be long before you ARE able to play at higher stakes, if you seriously understand the most basic (that is, anti-fish) NL theory.

but anyway, i'm gonna also recommend HoH I/II. but they're for tournament play, which is cool. for NL cash games, you're seriously MUCH MUCH better off learning from poker forums like this one.

Considering the following facts:
1) You can whore poker site bonuses and get free books,
2) Books are really cheap, considering that you will start winning hundreds of dollars once you get to EV+ at the lowest stakes

You can pretty much get your own poker library, consisting of all the good books. Books do really help you get a boost start into poker, and will show you things you wouldn't really think about if you just started playing. Let's put it this way: books teach you how to LEARN poker, what to pay attention to when you're losing big hands, and you can refer to the books early on for guidance. After that's it's just grinding hundreds of thousands of hands, and reading poker forums to improving.

Now, having said that, and considering the fact that books will be "free", here's the ones which are worth your time, with good read and re-read value:

-Harrington on Holdem (the best nl books, this man put Sklansky's whole poker poker author career to a laugh with his first book).
-Phil Gordon's little green book (reading it atm, very easy to grasp the concepts he's explaining, and this one has much more info on positional play, compared to Harrington's. I definitely have picked some nice things from this one).
-Theory of Poker (a tough read if you weren't good in school math.. but the advice is priceless).

Read those two multiple times, and you're crushing the low limits. After that, you can get the rest of the books and pick the few handful of things not explained anywhere else.

On February 21 2006 21:42 RiKD wrote: Show nested quote + On February 21 2006 21:13 WGT)DarkXprT wrote:   On February 21 2006 17:02 Muhweli wrote: DarkXprT, how's that readin' thing working out for ye? well, its working... it could seem very unbelievable but i do understand alot of NL theory, sadly i can't afford to play the stakes where that knownledge could be usefull. so you don't play poker? last time i checked NL theory can be applied to any and all stakes

It is too complex to apply it to the lowest NL limits at PS 0.01/0.02.NL
if you raise pf with AKs 5xbb and one guy limps in with 23o hitting trips in a 22A board. Poker theory becomes totally worthless. You really have to adapt your play to play on these limits. furthermore, for playing these limits you will need probably 20 solid buy-ins because of the beats you can take with these kind of people.

Meanwhile i have to play Limit and get a decent bankroll to play NL.. problem is limit at the lowest stakes is even more screwed and fishy. To be honest, i play Limit in a way you will easily go broke in high NL stakes. But that is because you need to outplay fish and that requires a different style of play. Lately i haven't been using much of a good bankroll management so i lose at NL what i've done in days or weeks at limit. I might deposit enough one of these days and start solid playing 0.02/0.05 NL at ps. or just play alot of limit until that happens. and hopefully i dont get bored.

what about NL theory in which you don't need to outplay fish on low limits nor should you try

the NL theory that says playing solid ABC poker is not only the way beginners should play but also happens to be one of the best ways to counter fish on low limits

On February 22 2006 00:06 WGT)DarkXprT wrote: Show nested quote + On February 21 2006 21:42 RiKD wrote:   On February 21 2006 21:13 WGT)DarkXprT wrote:   On February 21 2006 17:02 Muhweli wrote: DarkXprT, how's that readin' thing working out for ye? well, its working... it could seem very unbelievable but i do understand alot of NL theory, sadly i can't afford to play the stakes where that knownledge could be usefull. so you don't play poker? last time i checked NL theory can be applied to any and all stakes It is too complex to apply it to the lowest NL limits at PS 0.01/0.02.NL if you raise pf with AKs 5xbb and one guy limps in with 23o hitting trips in a 22A board. Poker theory becomes totally worthless. You really have to adapt your play to play on these limits. furthermore, for playing these limits you will need probably 20 solid buy-ins because of the beats you can take with these kind of people. Meanwhile i have to play Limit and get a decent bankroll to play NL.. problem is limit at the lowest stakes is even more screwed and fishy. To be honest, i play Limit in a way you will easily go broke in high NL stakes. But that is because you need to outplay fish and that requires a different style of play. Lately i haven't been using much of a good bankroll management so i lose at NL what i've done in days or weeks at limit. I might deposit enough one of these days and start solid playing 0.02/0.05 NL at ps. or just play alot of limit until that happens. and hopefully i dont get bored.

Maybe you could try just begging for money before moving up to higher stakes

HA!

PWNAGE :D

hahaha, thats funny.

sup Muhweli, you know I like you right? xD

he asked me for money too

I am stunned by this development.

On February 22 2006 05:27 Twisted wrote: he asked me for money too

Thank you all for great advice! I know alot of people think one should just play and dont mind the books but i want to read for amusement aswell. Im studying philosophy atm and i need something logical and structured to balance out all the abstract reasoning you get fed with in philosophyclass . I want a book with lots of math and mainly for cashgames so i think ill go for Theory of Poker. Thanks again

Yea books aren't a necessity, they're a shortcut.

HAHAHA ROFL no dignity.

Yeah, I've Asked money to, muhweli, pinball , Ket, (Twisted was a mistake), ibsu, of the posters. I've asked other people too, and the ones that did lend me, i really aprecciate it. Now im playing. I dont know what does it have to do with dignity lol. i want to play, cant deposit now, wtf is the problem. kids.

I'm offended... he didn't ask me for money!

HA rofl =)

DarXprT, your credibility went down by a notch. You're giving advice here after going broke on the lowest stakes on earth.

And begging money from people who hate you! (Yea that's me). <3

Wow too funny!!

one of these days darkxprt will leave the site crying and everyone will miss him

Yea true, I haven't seen abrasive-x lately either, I guess it's a bit controversial. I mean you hate 'em but they're still like your pets. Would be boring without. Weird.

gotta love his fighting spirit tho. He's sitting there on his penny tables, thinking "I'll show them... I'll fucking grind these penny stakes until I have... FIVE DOLLARS!!! MOHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!! and then I'll be the elder in my mexican village huk ^^"

Holy shiet!

*runs to beg all the recognized members for money*

darkxprt, this is not an insult, just a reality check.

you're right about needing a good-sized BR to handle bad swings. but here's the thing...if you have even a medium BR, like 15-20 buyins, and you truly have an understanding of how to play NLHE correctly, you will at least beat the worst possible players. it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact. it's alright to be humble and just realize you need to rethink your approach.

Myth is saying kindly what has been yelled in his face for weeks. But it's true.

On February 22 2006 09:51 [vital]Myth wrote: darkxprt, this is not an insult, just a reality check. you're right about needing a good-sized BR to handle bad swings. but here's the thing...if you have even a medium BR, like 15-20 buyins, and you truly have an understanding of how to play NLHE correctly, you will at least beat the worst possible players. it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact. it's alright to be humble and just realize you need to rethink your approach.

thanks for that.. i will play it and i can beat those limits. illplay it at 10-15 buyins
right now, im building up from almost nothing.. and im doing it good.

I can't overstate that books should be used as guidelines and to help u think analytically about the game, how YOU play the game best will depend on your personality, some ppl dont feel comfortable playing LAG for instance. That said, super system by dolye brunson is a must, and Harrington on holdem is a nice progression, there is no substitution for practice however....see u at the tables

On February 22 2006 09:51 [vital]Myth wrote: it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact.

Does not having patience to play that low count as not understanding? After 5 minutes I tend to just raise 20xbb with nothing on every single hand. ( Long time ago. I'll never set foot there again.)

I ususally play 0.10/0.25 and 0.50/1 ( 0.25/.050 is a really awkward place. nothing works there ) And I'm doing ok (not rich but extra bonus is never wrong)

I have a feeling darkxprt is going to be playing 0 clutter for a long time
lol @ him

madl33tness probably went broke too.

hhahahhaahhahaahh, this is too funny, his method of "outplaying" fish made him go broke.

rofl hahahahhaahah lol thats teh funny shit ;D

+ i want to know what erwin (twisted) replied. That must be hilarious shit ;D.

+ dark what is your name on pokerstars? i want to take that last 5 ;D

[B] + dark what is your name on pokerstars? i want to take that last 5 ;D

No way, those are mine

On February 22 2006 13:38 lucifer wrote: Show nested quote + On February 22 2006 09:51 [vital]Myth wrote: it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact. Does not having patience to play that low count as not understanding?

Yes.

On February 23 2006 07:09 Muhweli wrote: Show nested quote + On February 22 2006 13:38 lucifer wrote:   On February 22 2006 09:51 [vital]Myth wrote: it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact. Does not having patience to play that low count as not understanding? Yes.

So if you own high stakes and suck at micro you don't undertstand the game?

I've heard a lot of good stuff about Phil Gordon's Little Green Book, gonna check it out pretty soon. I also ordered Ace on The River by Greenstein, but from what I read it focuses a great deal on the biography of Greenstein and a mindset one should have.

On February 23 2006 08:05 lucifer wrote: Show nested quote + On February 23 2006 07:09 Muhweli wrote:   On February 22 2006 13:38 lucifer wrote:   On February 22 2006 09:51 [vital]Myth wrote: it's just that simple. if you're not beating the .01/.02 NL, you're not understanding NL, and that's a fact. Does not having patience to play that low count as not understanding? Yes. So if you own high stakes and suck at micro you don't undertstand the game?

You own high stakes?

On February 22 2006 00:06 WGT)DarkXprT wrote: It is too complex to apply it to the lowest NL limits at PS 0.01/0.02.NL if you raise pf with AKs 5xbb and one guy limps in with 23o hitting trips in a 22A board. Poker theory becomes totally worthless. You really have to adapt your play to play on these limits. furthermore, for playing these limits you will need probably 20 solid buy-ins because of the beats you can take with these kind of people. Meanwhile i have to play Limit and get a decent bankroll to play NL.. problem is limit at the lowest stakes is even more screwed and fishy. To be honest, i play Limit in a way you will easily go broke in high NL stakes. But that is because you need to outplay fish and that requires a different style of play. Lately i haven't been using much of a good bankroll management so i lose at NL what i've done in days or weeks at limit. I might deposit enough one of these days and start solid playing 0.02/0.05 NL at ps. or just play alot of limit until that happens. and hopefully i dont get bored.

this is a really dumb way to think, you have to adjust your play more as you move up limits, not the other way around.

if you can't beat the lowest stakes playing abc poker, you're not playing abc poker.

darkxprt is going to win like a bazillion dollars in poker in a few years. who'll be laughing then!

On February 23 2006 08:56 Muhweli wrote: You own high stakes?

Did I say that?