No, it isn't!

Look at your first equation. This is correct as far as it goes. i.e. if you have a 40% chance of winning $45 then this equates to an expected gain of +$18.

But, you are not freerolling.

In order to participate, you must pay $18 for the privilege.

Thus, your gain is $18; it costs $18; so net EV is $0.

Your 2nd equation is totally muddled thinking.

The reality is you will either receive $45 or $0.

If you have an infinite number of trials, this will average out to receiving $18 for each trial (your equation #1).

Then, you find out that each trial costs you $18 so the proposition is break-even.

Do you see why your 2nd equation doesn't make sense now?

But the times you win you get your $18 back, you lose $18 60% of the time, not 100%

I amended my above post to clarify this, but...

The times you win you get +$45. It costs you $18 to play and, yes, you get that back for a net gain of $45.

The times you lose, you get $0, but it costs you $18 to play so this is -$18.

Imagine we have this bet 100 times. The prize is $45.

It costs you $18 for each ticket (100 tickets).

Can you see that you will pay $1800 in tickets over the course of 100 games?

Now, in 40 of those games (40%), you will win $45.

So 40 * $45 = $1800.

In 60 of the games, you lose. You receive $0.

Net result?

Got it now?

I win?

fishlolface is correct. If we lose 5 times we lose 5*18=90. If we win twice we win 2*45=90. So if we win twice out of every seven times, or 28.6% of the time, we break even.

If you followed erniebilko's reasoning then in order to call a pot-sized river bet you'd have to win 100% of the time.

thank you for your posts

aaaaarrrrrrgggghh..
yes.

wtf was i thinking?

$45 to $18 is 2.5 to 1...

which is 5 to 2

which is 2 in 7

which is 28.57%.

what a mathtard.

With so much rubbish on the forums I would like to say to start with how impressed I am with this thread - some excellent reviews and well thought out analysis and discussion - gg guys!

I play mainly 3/6 and 5/T limit, so I feel the book is well suited to me. I have tried some NL25 - I have found the players there incredibly bad and I have run good (+17BB over 1000 or so hands lol) but I fear I would struggle at say NL100 as I don't know the theory. My strategy is based on like 3 DC videos and involves funneling in cash with the nuts and getting called by third pair.

Like the other HoH books - I have read the tournament ones - I have found this one to be very well written and pleasant to read. Much of the material in the first section I already knew but there is also material specific to NL that I had forgotten or needed refreshing. I have enjoyed reading it and I'm glad I didn't skip it like they suggest at the start for someone that has read their other works. If there are typos they are few and far between, and they haven't been a problem. I'm a bit concerned that there are misgivings about the 3 bet/4 bet section as this is one of the areas in which I am totally clueless. I'm also amazed by the amount of stuff on some of those HUDS, how do you ever get to see the screen!

I would like to know whether this book would be enough to get me better than break-even at say 100 NL. If not, what else would I need? Limit is likely to stay my mainstay for the foreseeable future and I don't want to put in thousands of hours to learn NL. How does this book fit with 'The Poker Blueprint'? Is it a replacement or at an easier/harder level? Is TPB worth getting in addition to this one?

I hope this isn't too off topic I am just looking for advice as to how best use the book really.

i know what you mean about 3/4/5 betting. I think this is a common problem. Also, I think he should have gone more in depth on c-betting and double-barrelling, which can also cause me to spew.

I saw a really good series on stoxpoker on 3/4/5 betting by Matt janda. Not sure whether it transferred to cardrunners or not, but have a look for it.

I also wish he had covered bankroll management,which is not even mentioned. How many buy-ins do you need for a particular level? I've read somewhere that you should have 100 buy-ins to be comfortable, but i don't know if this is a good number or excessive.

Zen and the Art of BR Management

there is something of merit within the Harrington/Robertie 3betting scheme that they really don't expound upon. While I do have problems with the balance of hands they are using, it seems as though they did not want to get into the 3 betting KQ v 87s v A4s v 33 debates and instead just grabbed a bit of all of them and left a bit of all of them. I find that grabbing a bit of all of those categories (broadways, suited connectors, suited aces, and small pairs) does keep your opponent on guard. It makes your potential range of hands tougher to counter. My problem still remains in that I don't think the right balance was found between those different sets of hands based on how those hands play post-flop or against 4bets. HOOCG's analysis was the type of first dip into a field that one might make. It looks at how the different hands would do versus the original raising range if one sees 5 cards. That analysis is a starting point, but not very good for the actual situation. For example, if I have A4s, I want to know not only how that changes the original raisers potential range, I want to know how A4s fares against the hands that the original raiser both 4bets with and calls with. I need to know how the holding continues on in various flops and whatnot. This appears to be completely missing. I know it seems minor, but anyone that has gone through the math on various blocking cards and postflop hand strength sees that it is not minor. This will effect the balance of what hands should be 3bet preflop.

Looks like a useful thread but in the initial post that 200BB for limit is not enough...anyway I won't derail this thread further.

I've almost finished Harrington's book and if you want to play limits higher than 25NL I don't think it's too good. If you don't beat 10NL or 25NL probably this book can turn you into a small winner.

First of all Harrington's book is a book, while Poker Blueprint is more a slip of paper or a guide. Some chapters have only 3 pages (4-betting, adjusting against different players, multi-way pots). Harrington/Robertie are BY FAR better writters than Davis/Nguyen.

But the content from Poker Blueprint is A LOT better than the content from Harrington's book. I was disappointed that many ideas/concepts are from other sources. A poster said a while ago that "Tri's book has no new matireal its all from other sources. Math examples exactly the same as Wilt on Tilt's DC series." Unfortunately (or fortunately) it's true. I've also found ideas from Easy Game (for instance the 3 reasons for betting) or from Ryan Fee's guide (for instance "the first time you lead should be with a weak made hand or draw") without citing the source (I'm not a copyright expert, probably citing the source wasn't necessary). No wonder the content is so good. If Harrington/Robertie would have copied ideas/concepts from other sources the result would have been a 5-stars book given the fact that Harrington/Robertie are also very good writters.

If you don't beat 100NL Poker Blueprint can turn you into a winner. It's a must read for micro stakes players. Some ideas are useful even for small stakes players.

I'll check with Aaron regarding the Math section. I've heard great things about Wilt's series. I've never watched it.

As for the reasons for betting, there aren't that many. Most, if not, all of high-stakes players know the reasons for betting. Most of us haven't read Easy Game.

It bothers me that you accuse me (or Aaron) of copying a general advice such as donk bet for the first time with a weak hand or a draw. Poker players talk to each other all the time. Most of the times, we come to the same conclusion regarding an advice without talking to each other. In LTBR (which was written about 2 years ago), there's an advice that says 3-betting for the first time is usually, if not, always a bluff. I don't expect nor do I care if anyone quote this. For all I know, they could've come up with this advice on their own through playing at the tables and talking with friends.

You didn't reply to the guy who said "Tri's book has no new matireal its all from other sources. Math examples exactly the same as Wilt on Tilt's DC series"
Usually when someone feels he was unfairly accused tries to defend himself. So I thought if you didn't reply maybe it was true. I apologize if it's not true.

Here are 2 old breathweapon posts:

Anyway this isn't the place to discuss these things. This is Harrington's book thread. I replied to RedHot's question and gave my opinion about Poker Blueprint. Probably you're right and I'm wrong (I said I'm not copyright expert). You don't have to cite David Sklansky's books if you're speaking about pot odds, semi-bluffing, etc. It would be absurd.

Amazing review.

Saved me some money on this.

Just wanted to point out that while the words "pot odds" originated a century ago, the words "semi bluffing" were coined by me in Holdem Poker. Nowadays a lot of people don't know that. Same goes for "implied odds".

Well Harrington is professional "writer". Nguyen are professional content givers.

Awesome, I just found this book at borders, can't believe it's already hit store shelves!

On pages 121-128, we are introduced to the three players “JeffJ”, “Lucious”, and “pushypete;” and we are given HUD stats for them as well. On pages 251-258, we are introduced to five more players, three of whom are Loose Lou, Aggro Al, and Mike the multi-table grinder; however, we are unfortunately NOT given any HUD stats for these guys.

I think that:
- the HUD stats given for “Lucious” would match well with Loose Lou
- the HUD stats given for “pushypete” would match well with Aggro Al
- the HUD stats given for “JeffJ” would match well with Mike the multi-table grinder (not sure about this one)

In other words, I think they describe the same player types, or at least almost do. Please give me opinions on this. I am pretty sure about the first two.

The reason why I am asking is that we are given a game plans on how to approach all the various players, but I wanted to know if all of the items in the game plans for “JeffJ”, “Lucious”, and “pushypete” can be applied to Mike the multi-table grinder, Loose Lou, and Aggro Al.

Loose Lou and “Lucious” seem to be exactly the same person.

Aggro Al and “pushypete” are very similar, except that pushypete is able to adapt; but still the stats will likely look similar (do you agree?) and the game plan can be applied to Aggo Al.

Mike the multi-table grinder and JeffJ also seem similar, but I am not as sure about this one. I think JeffJ might be more skilled than Mike, so perhaps JeffJ is more like Regular Ron (another player from pages 251-258)? In other words, maybe the HUD stats given for “JeffJ” would match Regular Ron better? Or maybe the game plan we are given for playing against “JeffJ” is a good game plan for BOTH Mike AND Regular Ron?

That’s how I would compare/contrast these player types, expected HUD stats, and game plans. Please give opinions.

I managed to get this book last tuesday from a online book store here in the UK.

Unfortuneately I didn't get it. I actually took it to the cafe with me, fell asleep while writing a paper, and when I woke up (about an hour ago), it was gone. (looked for it,but I don't know where they put books when they see them lying around).

Oh well, the book looks good, and at least I know it's on the book shelves.

I want to address a few of the comments I have read in this thread.

"You can get the information in Harrington on Online Cash Games from reading the 2+2 stickies and posts" - maybe but I doubt it. Even if that is correct the sheer amount of time sifting through threads and posts makes it impractical.

"You can get the same information in Harrington on Online Cash Games from training videos" - training videos are a good source of information. However, there are three problems with the idea that you can get the same information from them; (i) watching a single training video takes a long time. You would have to watch hundreds of hours of videos to get all the information presented in the book; (ii) many videos do not presenting accurate information. An advanced player knows good information from incorrect or situational specific information. Many of the readers this book targets for can't distinguish between correct and incorrect ideas; (iii) some of the training videos show good play but fail to explain the theory behind a play.
The beauty of Harrington on Online Cash Games is it has first class information and presents it with unparalleled clarity.

"The book won't help players above $25 NL" - this is just wrong. $100 NL and $200 NL players will benefit from reading ideas again, even if they know the ideas. More importantly, these players have holes in their games. This book is so comprehensive that it will help $100 NL and $200 NL players address things they are missing from their game, misunderstand, or are not implementing.

.

Harrington on Online Cash Games is by far the best online 6 max book on the market. The authors have set a new standard for books on online poker. This book is comprehensive, well written, and covers a huge amount of material.

One of the more impressive things the authors accomplish in the book is to mix poker theory and teaching players how to play. Usually a poker book covers one not both. Most importantly to many readers is that the book teaches you how to play, and will improve most readers games.

Harrington on Online Cash Games is targeted at beginners or novice players. I suspect this is because they make up the largest readership. The book will tremendously help beginners and novices play poker. However, it will also help more advanced small stakes players such as $100 NL and $200 NL. The reason it will help the small stakes players is that it is so comprehensive. The small stakes players will certainly benefit from the clarity of presentation. Some of that will be reiterating ideas they already know, but with tremendous clarity. All players have leaks in their games. And because this book is so comprehensive it will address topics these players either; (i) don't completely understand; (ii) are missing from their game; (iii) have absorbed but have now become standard and need to rethink why they take certain actions. The most important thing I can restate for this community is that even a winning $100 NL or $200 NL player has leaks and this book will cover things that help you plug those leaks. Additionally, some of the material players in the 2+2 community already know, but reading things again can only help your play.

I play higher and I found the book to be a helpful refresher on plays I make every time I play.

For players, beginners though $200 NL plus I think this book is a must read.

Unfortunately, I doubt the market is large enough for a volume 2 Harrington of Online Cash Games for Advanced Players. I would love to see these authors address more advanced concepts. One of the ancillary benefits of this book is that some advanced concepts are implied; so higher stakes players will also derive some benefit from the book.

Overall Harrington on Online Cash Games is a terrific book. Again, it is by far the best online and 6 max poker book on the market. I highly recommend it.

.

is amulet a shill?