“Don’t Listen to Phil Hellmuth” released

<img src="http://admins.liquidpoker.net/staff/Defrag/book_dontlisten.jpg" align="right" style="margin:5px; border:1px solid black;">Right before Christmas a brand new book from Drag the Bar instructor Dusty Schmidt called “Don’t Listen to Phil Hellmuth: Correcting the 50 Worst Pieces of Poker Advice You’ve Ever Heard” is introduced. This book is successor of Schmidt's successful book "Treat Your Poker Like a Business" and will be available in e-book format tomorrow, December 6th at DustySchmidt.net.

The book is divided into three parts. The first part is about the 50 misconceptions mentioned in the title. Dusty starts off every chapter with the misconception and goes through those, explaining how valuable advices from a year or two ago can no longer be profitable in online poker. The second part is reviewing 25 interesting hands Dusty has played online and going through the thought process in every single of the hand. The last part of the book is a quiz to see if you've understood the concepts explained.

Giving some examples explained in the books, Dusty mentions the following: "One main misconception that sticks out is “Bring your big guns to the big war.” This is a Phil Hellmuth quote, but a large percentage of poker players believe that you want to save your big hands for when you win a big pot. I think an online poker player might approach it as, “Are the plays I’m making profitable?” If a player feels strongly that an opponent can’t call a bet on the flop, call a raise on the turn, and call an all-in on the river, then I’m all for playing a humongous pot without a good hand. That chapter also has good situations to run big bluffs – what types of cards, what types of opponents, and other possibilities.

One of the misconceptions we talk about was my own advice. I’ve always said in my videos, “Punish the limpers,” but I have not found that play to be too successful anymore. So, one of the chapters is on punishing the limpers. Some of these weren’t misconceptions 15 years ago, or even two years ago, but they’ve evolved over time. People are still hanging on to that old advice. We’re not opposed to picking on anyone, even ourselves."

The book is advertised as "A comprehensive, 450-page manual on poker theory". You can order either the hard copy or an online copy (e-book) of the book for $49,99 , or order both for $59,99. The e-book will be emailed at December 6th, while the hard copy will be mailed at January 2nd.

I hope he gets sued

Looks kind of like slander (is that the correct law-term?) to me, I hope he has consulted someone before giving the book that specific title.

my immediate thoughts to this news update is that this book could play a star role in a new death trap horror movie.

I think the correct law term is libel. Phil Hellmuth would have to prove that things written about him were untrue and damaging. Seems kind of a tough case to me, but I'm not a law student.

On December 05 2010 07:57 Surprise wrote: I think the correct law term is libel. Phil Hellmuth would have to prove that things written about him were untrue and damaging. Seems kind of a tough case to me, but I'm not a law student.

Ok, so it isnt enough that the title implies that he sucks. Good for him.

well i'm assuming that if phil hellmuth accused schmidt of libel it would end up in american court, and there is no way in hell this would ever be ruled libel.
the real question is there anything that would allow phil to bring the case to a european court? i.e. who is the publisher...who knows, fuck lawyers.

hee hee it would be great if the court would have to decide a label suit on the grounds on "do phil helmuth's poker advices really suck?". Then the defendants would show that it indeed is the case (:

doesn't sound very likely scenario tho.

I liked his first book

Dusty Schmidts guide to success: Find an absolute drooler and play at a table with them. Lose slightly to everyone else. Beats my strategy of breakeven versus everyone and earn vpps though.

:D

You can't beat this face, he dodges bullets for fucksake.

On December 05 2010 08:05 rednalluk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2010 07:57 Surprise wrote: I think the correct law term is libel. Phil Hellmuth would have to prove that things written about him were untrue and damaging. Seems kind of a tough case to me, but I'm not a law student. Ok, so it isnt enough that the title implies that he sucks. Good for him.

not true... Phil Hellmuth would not have to prove anything. Leatherass is the one making the claims and he would have to prove his statements are true.

Both players are fucking donkeys so dont listen to leatherass either.

On December 05 2010 14:07 Baal wrote: Both players are fucking donkeys so dont listen to leatherass either.

http://www.pokertableratings.com/stars-player-search/leatherass9
http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=117


http://www.pokertableratings.com/stars-player-search/baalim

ouch lol

also leatherass is far from a donkey but the best part of his game is clearly his bumhunting

his first book was meh

yeah 206 pages of bragging

On December 05 2010 17:13 EvilSky wrote: also leatherass is far from a donkey but the best part of his game is clearly his bumhunting

he just plays a lot

not really worth writing a book about