At the risk of getting carried away with a week's worth of results, I think I can say with a modicum of confidence that I am a break-even player in the $22 SNG world of Party Poker. I have a basic grasp of strategy, I know some of the probabilities involved in common situations, and the key player types/ But I don't want to stay at this level, I want to improve.. which means reading books.
I bought a few poker books when I first took up the game last summer.
Phil Helmuth - Play Poker Like the Pros
With hindsight, this was probably a bit of a daft purchase, given my abject lack of skill at the time. However, it did open my eyes in one crucial aspect. He categorised players according to their playing style (mouse, jackal, elephant, lion, eagle) - and it was sobering to realise I was 100% in the "sucker" categories that the good players look out for. It made me realise that the skill element to hold'em was vastly larger than I had realised, and that my I was a cash machine to people who knew what they were doing. That insight alone was enough to stop me playing for a while - I went away and learned some basics of strategy, and came back a much tighter player (too tight as it happens, but that is a better starting point). So the book has probably saved me an awful lot of money for that reason.
I also bought a couple of other "idiots guide to" style books which were vaguely useful, if only for the odd page of probability statistics in them that were an eye opener. But nothing that would really help me improve.
So, after a bit of online research, there seemed to be the following consensus of what constitured essential reading:
- Theory of Poker by Sklansky
- Phil Gordons's Little Green Book
- Phil Gordons's Little Green Book
- Harrington on Hold'Em Volume 1
- Harrington on Hold'Em Volume 2
So, initial thoughts. I browsed through a couple of chapters of the Sklansky book, which tries to teach the general principles of poker play. My initial impression is that its a little above my head at the moment - I simply don't have enough experience in the locker to fully grasp a lot of the stuff in there., but every man and his dog says its an absulute essential classic, so I will persevere.
I suspect its one of those books that you need to keep coming back to after months and year and having a "oh NOW I get it" eureka moment and the penny drops about some particular point he is making. This is not a criticism of him or the writing style whatsoever - its a complete criticism of there being insufficient poker knowledge in my brain at the moment for much of what he says to attach itself to. I'll read it through though, and hope 10% of it sticks on the first reading.
The Phil Gordon books won't be so intimidating - they are much more practical guides into helping you make good decisions in specific situations. The advice in there I will definitely be able to grasp and put into action quickly (e.g suggested ways to play two pair, sets, flush draws, etc). Even if I can't grasp the exact mathematical reason WHY he suggest certain ways of playing hands, I am happy to follow the advice and work out the logic later. They both look like superb buys to me.
So initial impressions ? I am very optimistic that the 2 Gordon books alone will take me up the next level or two of playing ability. The Sklansky book will be a longer term project that I think will mean more to me in a few months than it does at the moment - I would think the better you are, the more it will help you.
I will keep you posted.
No comments:
Post a Comment