Upon rereading amulet's comments it seems he wasn't completely forbidding bluffing at nl200. My bad, didn't construct straw men on purpose.

Doesn't change the fact that amulet's comments regarding bluffing at nl200 are wrong and are more in line with nl25 games these days.

And he doesn't say that "bluffing is important at nl200" like your post suggests - on the contrary.

Your right he said bluffing at NL not 1/2 6 Max like the sentence before......my bad

Does not matter what the stakes are as both styles are solid at any level. It just depends on the players at each table your sitting at. Broadly applying one general strategy based on what level your playing is just bad level one poker.

How much is SPR discussed in this book?

IS there any content on how to play a 50 BB stack?

SPR is discussed mainly in the valuebetting part, in order to choose your line, know when you're committed etc. There isn't a specific part for shortstacked play, though.
I would say it's probably on purpose, since a shortstack takes away a lot of the plays the authors focus on.

The content is primarily focused on 100 BB stacks.

Funny!

I never wrote that no bluffing should take place at 1/2 6 max NL. To be clear, all players must bluff. It is an important part of the game. 3 betting light betting, betting with air when no one seems interested in a pot, reraising when the high card on the board pairs, etc., the list is endless, these are all "normal" sound bluffing opportunities that all players use. Aggressive play is important, bluffing is important. However, those examples are different from what is described in the bluffing chapter and throughout the book. "Barreling" at 1/2 6 max NL is dangerous because the players call too often. That was my point. I think the authors were not giving good advice for the games they were writing about, and following said advice will cost readers money.

Several people objected to me posting anonymously. The form allows people to post anonymously, that is the nature of the internet. Almost all posters don't give their real name unless they have something to sell. Additionally, since I post advice and hand in the PL/NL Hold 'em section, I want to remain anonymous.

There are players at 50NL with high winrates who barrel the turn a significant percentage of the time without the goods.

I would think that at that level its likely somewhat player specific.
i could be wrong though.

The way I see it, there are two different ways of going about it:
1. List the ways you make money, then explain how to apply those ways against your opponents.
2. List the things your opponents do wrong, then explain how to exploit those mistakes.

The authors took the first approach. My feeling is that the latter approach might be a bit clearer and might lead to a bit less focus on bluffing which might also be beneficial. As I said before, though, I'm sure the authors have had success explaining their approach this way, so to each his own. But for my students, I think the way the authors lay out the book will be too likely to lead to bad habits/thought processes.

No, What was found objectionable was how you kept telling Sunny you knew him and that you got on without telling him who you were. It was obvious that at least for a while you didn't even tell him via pm.

It is a good book, took a lot of work to write, and it is worth buying. That said, another thread reminded that wasn't it Ed Miller that came up with a shortstack stategy for NL that was supposedly unexploitable? Yet, I don't remember seeing anything in the book about using a shortstack or about how to play against it. Has it become exploitable now or did I miss something?

Didn't they said somewhere that that section isn't completely finished/polished and it will be in a future version/update?

Now this is funny too

I'm only halfway through but I find it rather disappointing. I'm a 50NL player but more than once while reading I said to myself 'Tell me something I don't know'. Everything seems really basic.