I'm looking forward to getting this book

the barnes and noble near me wont carry this book. i of course special ordered it and am one of the few people in eastern iowa to own a copy. suckerssss.

Or you could of ordered it from the 2+2 store and had it for a few weeks already.

Will this be available as an e-book anytime soon?

Yea, have you totally given up on the e-books? Even the old ones is not available. I also want this one and possible the next project as e-books, but not half a year after the paper version.

Hi Stefan:

All the e-books are being worked on, and as soon as we get everything right, which we hope will be in just a few days, they will go back up on site, plus the downloading capability to a reader device such as an Amazon Kindle or a Barnes $ Noble Nook will be available as well.

Then once we see that everything is working well, we'll convert a few more of our books to e-book format and that will include Analytical No-Limit Hold 'em. But my guess is that the conversion of this book is still three or four months off.

Best wishes,
Mason

Thanks for the quick reply Mason.

At least you are going to have it as an alternative.

You also explained in an earlier response that your working order is to first finish the paper version in ( I guess ) the old fashioned way, and after that convert to an e-book format.

The thing I do not understand is why the script (that is on a computer before going to the presses ) not can be edited and released directly in digital form. Is it because you first want to see that the printed version is as you want it, and later make a digital copy of that? Many publishers release e-books version before the printed ones, and some have both versions out at the same time.

But I guess (and hope) that then you find an e-book solution you are satisfied with it will go faster on future projects.

Hi Stefan:

Our book publishing doesn't work exactly as you describe. Once our book is finished, which means type-set and then proof read, it goes to the graphics department at our printer for other finishing work which includes dropping in the card pictures and other art work.

Once all of this is done, we could then go print or convert to e-book format, or perhaps do both at the same time. But the problem right now is that even though we currently do have e-book capability, there are still a few bugs being worked out, and this should all be solved in a few days. Thus the books we have done recently have not gone through the e-book process yet, and older books which were first printed many years ago certainly didn't have the opportunity for first being e-books.

That's why it will be a three or four months before we move a book like Analytical No-Limit Hold 'em into e-book format. We're not yet quite ready, and once ready, since we're already in the process of converting some of our other titles, we just want to make sure everything works as planned before we move into additional titles. But it's coming, and perhaps at some future time when we release a new book, we'll release both versions together.

Best wishes,
Mason

I've already said "I didn't want to start moaning or nit picking, so I'm sorry for mis-repping", I don't think any more of an apology is necessary for simply trying to discuss some balance spots with some peers. I've tried not to be disrespectful as best I could. Good luck with the book

The cover seems to be sort of scuff proof.

Q1. p81 - How did you arrive at the shove charts?
Q2. What does a blank square in those charts mean? (I am thinking if you have below 5BB then you should shove with any 2 cards?)

This was done using computer programs made specifically for generating such charts. There is no simple mathematical way to find them, otherwise that would have been included in the book. The technique for finding equilibria that is described in the book can be used for approximating the charts. However, in this situation, perfect optimal strategy does always not dictate that we should shove the top X% of hands, but that we shove a different range that includes some hands that are weaker against a random hand, but stronger against our opponent's range.

A blank square means that there is no stack size between 5 and 20 bb with which you should shove. The 5bb cut-off was chosen to keep the charts more readable; below that, ranges get wider very quickly. As-is, most common situations are covered.

Book is very good..too many pople questioning the book...

You do realize that not everything is all good in most books, right? Or did you think that "Play Poker Like the Pros" was very good and deserving of no criticism too?

This book has some great info. The range visualization piece alone was worth getting the book for. But along with the good comes some flawed info as well. You have to learn to think and use logic and experience to determine what's good and what's bad.

You also have to realize (not you specifically, but the numerous people in this thread clamoring for a thorough review) that the people who can give a detailed review probably don’t want to sit there and devote the time to writing one out so some random mouthbreather can use it to decide whether he’s going to drop the trivial amount to help his (no doubt weak) game improve.

I got my book yesterday morning. Only really had time to read the 3betting section so far, but more than enough to comment on.

1. Proof-reader should be sued. Hand example on p216:
The CO raises and calls a 3bet headsup with hero on button.
On the flop, there's a discussion about the BB calling a cbet.

I know that getting good help for technical poker books is tough, but this is just continuity/consistency.

2. Maths notation is inconsistent. On p207, notation is in the form "Pfold". On p198, probabilities are in the form "a, c, r, t". The first notation is far easier to read.

3. According to the index, there is no use of the terms "polarised ranges" and "depolarised ranges" in the 3betting section. This is a huge oversight. I had expected a detailed construction of 3betting and 4betting ranges both in position and out of position vs a selection of villains. At the very least, it doesn't discuss the term-of-art on the video sites and ebooks.

4. There is no discussion of small 4betting that I could see. The only statement was about "pot sized" 4bets based on a pot-odds argument. Considering the strength represented by a 4bet (ie, the range might be as tight as KK+) how is that relevant if villain is holding 99-QQ/AK and facing a raise to 26bb over a 10bb 3bet? I mean, AK is 5% vs AA, where does pot odds come into it?

I also looked at the stuff on HUDs. Simply refers to Harrington on 6max. No discussion about convergence rates of different stats.

If Two+two want a highly math- and poker-literate proof reader (one with the skills and desire to construct spreadsheets to check each calculation) send me a PM.

part of the fun of reading a 2P2 book is finding the errors.
anyways i have ordered this and harringtons new book and look forward to digging in.

Just a guess, but I don't think Mason would agree with or intend this.

Errors aren't like a nice little easter egg or something.

I find the better the book (ie, more specific and detailed), the more likely you are to find errors. Maths of Poker is surely the book with the most accurate, most groundbreaking content. It's also the book that has a typo every few pages. My point is, enough of the thinking machinery is in there that you can spot the errors.

Similarly, one of the Harrington books did ICM calculations. At the time, I thought the numbers were wrong on a couple of examples. Whether I was right or wrong, it was possible to try to check the information. That isn't possible with even SS, and certainly isn't possible for the more trashy books.

So errors are sometimes like a "canary in the coal mine" to point to a book that's good IMO. An error is only a problem if you're a muppet that takes the books as gospel, rather than a "thinking player".

Two plus Two errata are actually a code that once broken reveals to the codebreaker all the riches to be found in this world and the next.

p.299, Combinatorics Exercises

Q. 1: Calculate combos of each hand for AJo+, ATs+, KQs, and TT+, as well as the sum of all combos ... no outside factors listed such as cards out etc.

p.309 Printed answer to the above question:

Hand: TT+
Combos per hand: (3)(2)/2 = 3
Count: 5
Total Combos: 15

Shouldn't this be:

Combos per hand: (4)(3)/2 = 6
Count: 5
Total Combos: 30

or am I missing something?

If I'm not missing anything, sum of combos changes to 86, the probability of a PP in opp's hand changes to 34.88%, and probability of an ace changes to 67.44%

I pointed this out earlier in the thread. I believe the book is wrong and you and I are correct.

Oops, missed your post. I think I was trying to forget the 1st page of this thread ever happened

TT+ should be 6 combos each x 5 = 30 combos. unless there is a flop or something and we are accounting for card removal, which we arent.

This is such a big error. There are probably a decent amount of people who will never look at this forum and who will be completely confused at how the author arrived at this (incorrect) answer.

Looked briefly at the thread, but couldn't find whether the author's screen names are public. Are they?