Smashing Fewer Holes in Your Computer Desk: Written Insights on Modern Internet Poker , by Jon Tannen

http://www.smashingfewerholesinyourcomputerdesk.com/

Note: I have been a friend of Jon’s for years. I’ve enjoyed his strategy contributions in SSNL and his blog, and expected the same quality in this instructional product. Jon asked me to review this product a few days ago, so here it is:

Smashing Fewer Holes in Your Computer Desk: Written Insights on Modern Internet Poker by Jon Tannen is a full package product. What I mean by this is that it is not strictly an e-book or purely a video product, but both. It is comprised into two sections: the strategy articles and the video analysis of three students. There are several download links and it took me about an hour to download the video package (your results/internet speed may vary).

This product is not a step by step book on poker. You won’t find dozens of starting hand charts or descriptions on basic poker terminology. The audience for this book would probably be $50NL-$400NL players (obviously with some exceptions). You are expected to have a basic, fundamental understanding of poker in order to take full advantage of this product.

Strategy Articles:

There are 10 strategy articles in the package. The topics are commonly asked questions for many players- “c-betting vs. checking behind flops”, “pocket pairs vs. habitual 3-betters”, “determining when to 3-barrel”, and others.

I thought all of these were well written. The articles themselves are not tremendously long; maybe a few pages apiece. They are concise and to the point, and potentially very valuable to those learning these concepts for the first time.

Jon is very heavy on math in his approach to poker. Though I’m not fantastic at the math involved with poker (funny story: It was actually Jon who helped me figure out some EV calculations years ago/coolstorybro), Jon explains the math in an easy manner.

Note: One thing I might have liked a bit more in the strategy articles are some hand histories to accompany the analysis. It could be personal preference, but I know I learn things easier when given visible examples with analysis. That’s not to say that these articles lack hand histories entirely (because they don’t), but I wish there had been a few more.

All in all, the articles are informative and to the point. I enjoyed reading about some of the common problems that many players have questions about.

Videos and Analysis:

The meat of this package is seen in Jon’s video analysis. The process for this instruction is:
-Open the videos from the zipped file.
-Open the corresponding video analysis document.
-Follow the time stamp and hand analysis, pausing frequently while you read the notes/analysis.

-There are 3 videos in this analysis, 1 of them 50NL, the next a 50NL/100NL hybrid, and the other 200NL. They range from 45 minutes – 1 hour and 25 minutes.

Warning: Reading and following along with the videos is a very long process. You’ll need to continuously pause and play the video in order to read along with the analysis as it occurs. This is a product for a serious student who is willing to dedicate time and effort in this process. I know this much should be obvious, but I just wanted potential buyers to be aware of this.

This is the primary learning tool in Jon’s product. Jon dissects nearly every situation in his student’s video. He discusses alternate lines, why the play was good or bad, the EV calculations, the psychology of his opponent, and many other elements involved with the poker hand. Jon frequently references his strategy articles accompanied in the product in order to further hammer a point or concept home. Outside strategy articles, music links (such as this- http://youtu.be/ZyhrYis509A ), and funny low content articles are also linked within the analysis.

I quite enjoyed this section of the product, as there are a variety of situations that Jon’s students encountered. There was also a Q/As written in the first video, which was informative.

Criticisms and Questions

There were a few minor things that I think would help a bit. I already mentioned that I appreciate a few more hand histories in the strategy articles. One reason why Jon probably didn’t include as many of these is because he frequently referenced the articles in the video analysis.

I believe this product to be strictly strategy oriented. What I mean by this is that there aren’t too many alternate articles or advice pertaining to the other elements in poker (being bankroll advice, psychology, and others). Personally, I would have appreciated a few alternate articles concerning other elements in poker, but again, this could just be personal preference.

I would have also liked a few more articles in the strategy section. There are many topics that Jon could go into further detail on. At the top of my head, a ‘donking’ article, ‘deep play primer’, and others all would be beneficial.

With regards to the videos, I sometimes found myself a bit lost trying to reference the videos at the exact points to the analysis. The reference is written in this manner:

(21:20 (T3)) (In reference to Table 3). I feel like this would be MUCH easier to reference if Jon wrote the actual hand next to the reference. Something like this:

21:20 (T3) (AA)

Would be much easier to find the hand. This COULD just be nittery though.

In all poker products that I’ve purchased or read in the past, one section I’ve always enjoyed was the ‘Hands played by me’ portion. Though I obviously had a great deal of hands shown to me in the analysis portion in this product, they weren’t played by Jon. Having something like a 20 hands played by Jon (and analyzing said hands) would be pretty cool. He probably didn’t include this because this product IS primarily a hand analysis package from his students…but yeah.

Conclusion

I enjoyed this product and feel that it can definitely benefit a 50NL-200NL player immensely. The primary reason being that Jon approaches many problems and questions that micro/small stakes players have.

Be prepared to work through this product. As stated previously, it is very time consuming and very in-depth. You’ll also need to account for the external strategy articles that Jon frequently links as well in order to supplement your learning. And again, this product is not for a 10NL player just starting out in poker. It is for higher micro and small stakes players (perhaps some MSNL as well) who have a good grasp on the fundamentals in poker.

Before people buy this product (and other poker products; be it coaching or instruction), they need to understand a few things first: This is not a magic elixir that will turn you into Phil Ivey, nor is it a guarantee that you will even turn into a winner at your level. It is merely something to push you in the right direction for further poker education. Jon introduced you to EV calcs? Good, now go learn more about it. Jon walks you through a simple hand reading exercise? Great, now go read more on the subject. And so on.

Best level I have seen on this board in a long time. Better then being Rick Rolled.

I love the Red Bull can in the video on the desk while the guy is playing and of course the guy is playing on Full Tilt. ;P

Then the package includes Red Bull. I love it.

Well done guys.

Dave,

Thanks again for posting this.

All,

I'm the author of SFHiYCD. I'm not a B+P reg, though I do lurk it a bit. I know that marketing one's product(s) here is frowned upon by 2+2 and I won't be doing that (I pay for a listing in the "Cash Games Poker Coaches" sub-forum in which I'm allowed to do that if I please, though I much prefer to let my students do my marketing for me even there). However, I'll be monitoring this thread and looking to post substantive replies to the questions that might arise in it. SFHiYCD isn't cheap and those who are considering buying it deserve to have an authentic idea of what they'd be getting.

Respectfully,
Jon

Honey Badger,

Just to be 100% sure we're on the same page, the "infomercial" is meant to get people to chuckle, but I'm very serious about this product.

btw, my actor is playing on "Full of **** Poker," not FTP.

so this is an actual real product?

Yes.

I could've given it a more ominous title like "Obliterating SSNL and MSNL Cash Games" or "How to Rip Your Opponents' Faces Off in No-Limit Hold 'Em," but I decided to break the mold and go with something a bit more comedic (and honest?). My hope is that potential buyers will realize that someone crazy enough to pour hundreds of hours into creating something like this and then title it this way might also be crazy enough to help them start winning (or start winning more) at this silly game.

Plus, I've smashed holes in several IKEA computer desks during sessions of Internet poker. True story.

I suspected that.

Your informercial is funny. I have never known Orange to be a prankster. You might want to be careful, the informercial as funny, but it does make the product look like a level. Especially with the Red bull cans around the workbook and the Mr. Popeil presentation.

I enjoyed watching the video but unless I knew a whole lot about you would probably not take the product seriously.

Good luck with it though.

Ha, appreciate it.

FWIW, the video is meant to be viewed in the context of my written ad, which clarifies the nature of the product.

I'm also proud to say that I'm probably going to be interviewed by PokerNews in the near future and that they'll likely be posting the result along with a review of the product. Aside from that, additional reviews from 2+2ers will likely be forthcoming.

Jon gave me a copy of his product to review. When I was learning the game I found his sticked SSNL posts very valuable and we've spoken before about trading.

There are 3 sections of this product, “Strategy” which contains 10 short strategy articles designed to be consulted during the videos, “Videos” which contains 3 leak-finder style videos with accompanying written analysis and “Other” which contains some images, acknowledgements, instructions and, for some strange reason, two off-topic blog posts.

The product is available for $500 which is obviously quite a lot considering the amount of decent quality information that is now available for relatively cheap prices but it’s hardly outrageous in comparison to some other coaching products. $300 will get you the strategy articles and one of the videos while $75 will get you the strategy articles.

There’s a bit of messing around with unzipping files and password-protected pdfs but, if you’ve spent the money, I doubt you’re too worried about the time this takes.

Strategy Articles

“Balance vs. Exploitation” – This is an article which appeared in the inner circle. It discusses the difference between a balanced approach and an exploitative approach and makes a strong case for erring on the side of the exploitative approach in general. While I agree that players can sometimes place too much emphasis on balance, I don’t feel that the article did a particularly good job of explaining the benefits of balance.

Without giving away all of the details, the main thrust of the article is that most players, especially at low stakes, won’t have a strong idea of your ranges, may not make the correct play if they do and, even if they have and do, the player pool is so large that you’re unlikely to play many hands with them anyway.

However, what’s overlooked is the fact that we’re in exactly the same boat. Despite our best efforts, we usually don’t have a strong idea of our opponent’s ranges either, for the same reasons. One strategy we could default to is to use whatever information we have to make the most exploitative play, even if we’re right 51% of the time we’ll still make more than being balanced surely? Actually this isn’t the case. To take a simple example, if we decide that the best exploitative play on a particular street is to bluff 100% and in the next similar situation decide that the best play is to bluff 0%, then our average hand strength is at the 50% mark. However, if we played a balanced approach of bluffing our strongest 50% each time then our average hand strength is at the 25% mark. This isn’t a huge issue in river situations (unless you happen to be against a calling station who’ll call with worse than some of your bluffs) but is an extremely big issue on earlier streets where your best bluffs will have significantly more equity against your opponent’s calling range than your worst bluffs. Your opponent doesn’t even need to adjust to exploit you, you’re essentially exploiting yourself.

The second important point about balance is that, besides very obvious situations, it's difficult to know where somebody is exploitable if you don't know where balanced is to begin with. As well as that, if you notice somebody is exploitable but your default play is the wrong side of balanced, you could end up making the correct adjustment and still be getting exploited (although not as badly as you would have been had you not adjusted at all). Understanding how ranges interact and the actual reasons for why certain strategies work is extremely valuable and can only really be arrived at through a good understanding of balance.

“Preflop Primer” is an article on opening, calling, 3betting and 4betting. It contains short, punchy paragraphs that cover extremely important topics without any filler. It contains guidelines for minimum “cutoff points”, sometimes with the accompanying math. I agreed with almost everything that was said in it, which I very rarely do when reading other player’s thoughts on preflop play. Even though I enjoyed the concise format, I would imagine that a less experienced player would be left with more questions than answers after reading it as there are only a few accompanying reasons for why the advice is given. You could ask in the 30 minute skype session though.

The “ranges of hands to play from the blinds” against late-position raises article is very short and contains guidelines for what to play without explanation. The “playing small pocket pairs against habitual 3-bettors” is another short article, this time covering the math behind 4bet shoving.

“W$WSF %, W$SD % and WTSD %”. Another brief article covering some conclusions you can make from an opponent’s W$WSF, W$SD and WTSD stats. A big omission is guidelines for how many hands are needed for these numbers to become significant although this topic is mentioned in parts of the video analysis. “Number ranges for peripheral stats” is another very short article listing guidelines for 21 stats without explanation. Just to give an example:
“Call flop continuation bet%: 22-=very low; 23-30 = low; 31-38 = average; 39-46 = high; 47+ = very high”.

Continuation betting vs. checking on the flop discusses the situations in which you should prefer to check rather than bet as the PFR. Again there’s little accompanying explanation for the reasons why this advice is given. However, “Conditions that should make you more likely to 3-barrel bluff” was more in-depth.

“Determining whether you have enough fold equity to go all-in” contains an example hand with an EV equation to calculate how often you need your opponent to fold. “Suggested HUD layout” contains a list of stats to have on the table and in a popup.

As a stand-alone product, $75 is a lot of money for very little content. Personally, I vastly prefer correct information without explanation rather than bad information with pseudo-logic explanations which a lot of products contain. On forums I’d prefer the one line input from a good player and be forced to figure out the why myself rather than several paragraphs of nonsense from somebody who doesn’t have a clue. I feel that the advice is very solid and that, fleshed out, it could be an extremely good product but I’m not sure I’d be able to recommend it as a stand-alone purchase in its current format.

Videos

Before I go into the leak-finder videos I should probably mention that I typically wouldn’t have sought them out on training sites. I’ve always been a lot more interested in the theoretical side of poker and leak-finder videos, as well as most playing videos, usually aren’t conducive to in-depth theoretical discussions. Powerpoint videos, articles and books are typically a better format for that type of content.

The folders contain the video, the HUD layout that’s used, the analysis and a picture of the student. With the $300 option you get the 90 minute video which also contains some of the student’s additional comments on his video.

The analysis is very detailed, 65,000 words over the three videos according to Jon’s coaching page. After what must have been at least an hour I had gotten through 20 minutes of the first video and realised there was no way I’d be able to go through the whole thing and have this review out in any sort of timely manner. You need to pause the video to read the comments and sometimes go back when action overlaps on different tables. Having gotten a flavour of the hand analysis, I decided to skim the rest of the analysis to look for in-depth tangents into different topics. So while I don’t have a fully comprehensive view of the product I do feel I know a significant amount about the type and quality of the content.

In the analysis, most of the non-trivial hands are discussed and the majority of these are given a very in-depth discussion. Preflop folds that should have been calls or 3bets are pointed out, the reasons for the general strategy and the reasons in the particular situation are discussed, typically making reference to the opponent’s stats, position and stack size. As well as this, there will often be guidelines for the minimum hand strengths which would be played in a given situation, making reference to the opponent’s you’re facing. Good and bad bet sizing is pointed out along with the reasons why.

Postflop the plan for the hand is discussed, the advantages and disadvantages of different options, various alternative possible situations are mentioned (different turn or river or opponent) and advice is given on what to do in those scenarios. There is also discussion of what should be done if hero held different hands. The majority of the time the opponent’s hand range is dissected and often a breakdown of the applicable math is presented. The math isn’t advanced, there’s no game theory type content for example, it’s usually EV equations, minimum equity or folds required, pot odds or implied odds type calculations.

Although there aren’t discussions of bankroll management and other “non-strategy” poker topics that are often covered in poker books, the discussion does digress into uncommon topics from time to time, examples include note taking, getting reads based on your opponent’s handle, when you should be making plays for image, the danger of heuristics, how to compensate for your natural tendencies, non-showdown winnings, table selection, seat selection, being aware of training site video producers style of play when attempting to learn from them. As well as that there are links to some of Jon’s 2+2 posts for additional reading about a topic that's being discussed. During the 90 minute video analysis there’s a brief interlude to answer some of the student’s questions (on both the strategy articles and video).

Where applicable there’s comparisons to earlier hands and the factors that make the decision similar or different. Due to the format a lot of the advice ends up focusing on preflop and flop play but the discussion of the plan for the hand and the possible scenarios that can be faced helps to offset this. However, rarer situations naturally end up getting less coverage and some overlap of discussion on common situations is unavoidable.

Conclusion

Overall, when trying to find your own leaks, I’m sceptical of leak-finders in general compared to having your own play dissected for leaks by a coach. I think that products like these make more sense when they cover the theory of the game as paying a coach for several hours to take you through theory isn’t hugely efficient. Although you may have some of the same leaks as the students, you might not always recognise it or convince yourself that it’s ok because you have a different style of play.

If you’re looking to plug leaks then I think, for the money, you’d probably be better off getting coaching with Jon as the advice is extremely good and I think it’s more likely you’ll plug leaks this way. If you’re looking for in-depth theoretical discussion I don’t think leak-finder videos are the best format and I don’t feel that the strategy articles are fleshed out enough. Perhaps the most efficient approach if you’re looking to get coaching with Jon is to get the strategy articles and the 90 minute video before getting coaching so that you’ll have the chance to become familiar with Jon’s approach (and the reasons behind his recommendations) in your own time which would allow the coaching to be more time efficient.

cross-posting from tannenj's coaching thread...

Jon sent me a copy of Smash Fewer Holes in Your Computer Desk a few days ago. First let me say that I know Jon because we've been regulars in the same sections of 2p2 and have played in the same games for a number of years. My respect for Jon is a result of my years of reading his incredibly detailed and reasoned opinions on how to best play NLHE.

I'm about 1/3 of the way through the material so far but I wanted to go ahead and post some of my thoughts. This is a unique package that really stands out from the other more traditional educational products.

What sets Jon's product apart is, unsurprisingly if you've ever read any of his posts on this site, his incredible attention to detail. If you think back to when you were a beginning player, you probably never had to think for very long about any of your decisions, because quite simply you didn't know what to think about.

What this product does is show you exactly what a successful midstakes player is thinking about at each point in the hand.

Decision making in poker essentially boils down to an understanding of the math of the game, the HUD statistics at your disposal, and your best guesses about the tendencies of your opponents. Jon's approach here is perfectly suited to that end -- he starts with 10 theory articles that are referenced repeatedly throughout the rest of his material that provide you with a theoretical and mathematical framework for your decision making.

The meat of the product is Jon's written analysis on the three student videos. In this analysis he provides a ridiculous amount of information. I left myself almost all day today to work through just one video and read through his analysis, and I'm still not quite done. Probably my favorite aspect of this material is that each seemingly simple decision is attacked from each angle in several paragraphs.

I think a lot of players have gotten by for a number of years just by knowing better than others about what they should be doing, but without ever really knowing why they should be doing it. Now that games are getting tougher having this deep understanding is more important than ever.

Jon considers some things that I didn't even know were possible to consider. To give one specific example, Jon breaks down a postflop situation in a 3bet pot by considering the relationship between the villain's WWSF and W$SD statistics, and how that relationship gives an accurate look into how villain's range is weighted at that moment.

I can't wait to finish the rest of this product. When I do I'll report back with some more specific examples. Apologies if this post sounds hyperbolic, but I really do think this product is excellent and is easily worth the cost for any 50nl+ player (and probably 25nl players if you can afford it).

Love the title of this book!
I haven't read it and I'm not a cash but HOLY sh$t I love this title. WP Sir.

A few weeks ago, I purchased a copy of Smashing Fewer Holes in Your Computer Desk: Written Insights on Modern Internet Poker. I did so based mostly on my prior experience with Jon Tannen, as I had some professional and insightful coaching and was eager to get my hands on some written content.

I'll be honest: I'm picky when it comes to buying poker related products, so when I started writing this review, I set out to answer the question: Is this title worth the money? While most publications offer a clear “yes,” or “no,” SFHiYCD offers a slightly more frustrating (but worthwhile), “it depends.”

The meat of the product is a series of videos – Jon's students record a play session, then Jon offers a written response. Each response is exhaustive, with links to Jon's other poker theory documents and more detail piled on. Rather than take an overall, generalized approach, Jon gets right down into the trenches and goes hand by hand, one at a time, through three different student videos.

It's daunting. I spent several days just working through one student video. By the time I got to the end I questioned what to do with what I'd learned. I'd certainly learned a lot, but there is just so much densely packed material that it was difficult to distill what I had learned down into a few general statements.

Consciously or not, I think SFHiYCD attempts to deal with a fundamental problem: Poker is hard. It's complicated. Books just covering the concepts and outlining hand ranges never quite seem to capture the “real” thought process of an individual hand, but that's what Jon's work accomplishes in crushing detail.

Jon holds nothing back in this text, it's clear that he's poured every drop of his poker knowledge into the material. Instead of talking theory, SFHiYCD talks mental process. The work is essentially a long string of examples on how to think through real poker hands.

This isn't a product for beginners. If you want discussion of basic theory and general concepts, it's going to be hard to do better than published books like Professional No Limit Hold'em Volume 1 or Small Stakes No Limit Hold'em. Jon doesn't try to emulate or rewrite these books, but instead strikes out into new territory. When a player gets all that theory, then wonders, “how do I use all this at the table?” SFHiYCD has the answer.

This text has taken a huge amount of energy and effort to truly digest. I'm still going through it, and still learning from it, and I expect I will be for some time. For those that want one size fits all answers and poker platitudes and band-aids to patch up a leaky game, this is definitely not the text for you. But if you're willing to study and work through hand after hand alongside a great poker mind, SFHiYCD is a rewarding experience, and definitely worth the buy.

Thank you. If I decide to put out a sequel, perhaps I'll title it "madison79 presents SFHiYCD II." I don't think I'm going to put out a sequel because spending ~10 hours a day for two months on the first one nearly killed me, but we'll see.

I'd like to take a moment to bring a few things to people's attention and respond to some of the content in the first two reviews in this thread (if 2+2 considers this post self-promotion, it would be great if a mod could move it to my coaching thread ... it fits better here, IMO, but I'm not 100% sure what's permitted and what's not).

-I won't be marketing this thing aggressively like X, Y, and Z. It's not because I think such tactics are -EV in terms of sales (that's clearly not the case; people are too gullible and malleable for it to be the case), it's because that sort of thing makes me uncomfortable. With that string of logic in mind, it's possible that I'll have one or more individuals market it on my behalf at some point in the future. This depends on my sales. I put a ton of time and effort into this thing and would like to make some money from it.

-My refusal to "play the game" is the reason I've sent out a handful of free/discounted review copies to a variety of individuals. I respect everyone to whom I've sent a review copy. They have varying backgrounds. Some are grinders. Some are theoreticians. Some are writers. Some have been extremely publicly critical of the authors of educational poker products and poker coaches (I am both of these things, obviously), especially the ones who offer services of the pricy variety (I'd describe both my product and my coaching as "pricy"). I didn't make requests of or give advice to any of my potential reviewers. If they asked, I simply made it clear that I was looking for two things: honesty and thoroughness. I'll be linking to every single review on the product's web site -- even the unfavorable ones, though I don't expect to get many of those. I'll list the favorable ones above the unfavorable ones, of course, and I'll do my best to pick out quotes that paint the product in the best light. But every review will be there (unless an author specifically disallows such, of course).

-I expect to see people discussing my pricing at some point. That sort of discussion seems to take place in this forum often. I think it's trite, but it's worth emphasizing that -- as you probably know already if you've read the previous posts in this thread -- this product is meant for people who are very serious about their NLHE games (three of my first four reviewers have yet to make it through the material; the fourth is finished but has posted that it's "taken [him] a huge amount of energy and effort to truly digest"). If you're a breakeven player or a marginal winner at, say, $50 NL through $600 NL and decide to buy this product and take a serious shot at absorbing the material within (a task that would require dozens of hours), you'll probably find that you got tremendous bang for the buck. If you're a $10 NL player who has mediocre NLHE fundamentals and is looking for a "system" ... well, just don't buy it. It's also worth noting that -- as every poker coach who releases a product like this is wont to point out -- the product's cost is based on my coaching rate. My coaching rate isn't something I concocted spontaneously; it's based on the coaching market. I started taking students at a relatively cheap rate in September of last year and was twice forced to raise it based on due to a huge number of requests.

As one might suspect, there are relatively few hand histories in the strategy articles because the video analyses are rife with hands that serve to flesh out the rationale in the strategy articles. Obviously, this does little good for the individuals that buy the strategy articles independently, as RedJoker points out in his review. However,

1. The strategy articles are me throwing a bone to the individuals who can't afford (or don't want) to drop hundreds of dollars on something like this. They're meant to bolster the customer's understanding of NLHE fundamentals and provide him or her with a few new "tricks." My willingness to allow each person who buys the strategy articles to "complete his or her purchase" by subtracting the strategy articles' cost from the cost of the entire product (or the "mini-product") reflects the idea that the strategy articles are meant to be utilized in conjunction with the entire product (or one of my personal video analyses). Furthermore, my willingness to deliver a one-hour coaching session to everyone who buys the strategy articles and ships me $30 (the difference between my current coaching hourly and the cost of the strategy articles) within a few weeks of his purchase is A. also reflective of such and B. consistent with the fact that I send the strategy articles to every new student I take on these days.

To be clear, I obviously think the strategy articles provide good bang for the buck regardless of these things (if that wasn't the case, their price would obviously be lower [respected 2+2ers have suggested that I sell the strategy articles for more than the price on which I decided]).

This is absolutely the case; I make no secret of it. The product is technical, as is my coaching. If you're looking for "mental game" material that's designed to get you to tilt less or put in more hours at the tables, neither my product nor my coaching is for you. My stuff is calculus, not poetry.

I could have included literally thousands more strategy articles. Poker is endlessly discussable. FWIW, I didn't come up with the idea to produce articles about the covered topics myself. Every article was created because it was specifically requested by a student of mine. Eventually, I decided to begin maintaining a collection of sorts and sending it to every new student I took on in an attempt to provide better value and save time (see above). These articles exist because students wanted them to exist.

Not a bad suggestion, IMO. However, each hand begins exactly at the noted time (if you own the product and are curious, please take a look -- you'll find that every single hand in the video analyses finishes getting dealt at the exact second that's noted). It was a huge pain in the ass, to be honest. The idea is for each customer to do lots of jumping back and forth so as not to miss any of each hand's preflop action. For this reason, I didn't think it necessary to note each starting hand next to each timestamp.

As my man suspects, the fact that there are hundreds of students' hands analyzed in the package is the reason I didn't include analysis of my own hands. From my perspective, it matters little who played the hands. It's likely that I unintentionally misled people a bit by using the phrase "written leak finders." The student videos are little more than a mechanism that allows me to thoroughly discuss a variety of NLHE situations.

I'm confused about the last nine words of this quote. My reasoning for including the (revised) blog posts should be quite clear. It's provided right at the top of each article. I'd rather not spoil the content of these articles because they're "extras" that are meant as a "thank you" to the buyer, but it's odd to me that my reasoning could go unnoticed by such a smart guy (I've always thought of RJ as a very smart guy; that's part of the reason I sent him a review copy).

FWIW, I believe RJ is misinterpreting my definition of "exploitative" as it concerns NLHE. One's equity against the range with which a villain will continue is a huge component of a powerful exploitative strategy.

The accompanying reasons are bursting out of the video analyses; that's why the structure of the product is the way it is. Again, that's not necessarily helpful to those who buy only the strategy articles, but I cover this issue in my response to orange's first quote.

My apologies for the TL;DR offering. I hope that this post will 1. clarify several things and 2. serve as a taste of the sort of writing and thinking that exist in SFHiYCD. FWIW, I don't consider sound poker thinking to be a different animal than sound general thinking; as I see it, both reward the consideration of all factors in play and the application of straight logic. My girlfriend -- who's also the creator of my "infomercial" -- could attest to the fact that I think this way; she's often been agitated by my dedication to this sort of approach.

That quote sounds like it's from me, and I just wanted to clarify that I am by no means finished with the material. ^ ^

This is going to be difficult to explain without spoiling the content. For the article about the person, I read the introduction "A portion..." as an aside rather than an explanation for why the article was included. However, I don't feel the content of the article creates a good impression for the product.

The other article could have used a brief explanation of the format of the game for those who aren't familiar with it. Perhaps it's just because I'm unfamiliar with both the person and the game that I didn't find them as useful as other people would.

I agree, I'm not claiming otherwise. You could take top 10% and top 50% bluffing frequencies (so you're using your equity) and your average hand strength ends up being worse then playing top 30%.

If your opponent is playing a balanced strategy then any deviation you make from your own balanced strategy is always, at best, neutral EV and usually negative EV. Of course, your opponent usually isn't playing a balanced strategy but, if you don't know which way they're exploitable (and, like I said, despite our best efforts we sometimes won't for the reasons you outline in the article), then it's almost equivalent, except that you'll have the chance to guess right rather than always losing. Conversely, by being balanced yourself in these situations you guarantee yourself neutral EV and almost always a positive EV.

Yeah, if somebody was just interested in the strategy articles I doubt they wouldn't take a $30 coaching session with it at the very least but I felt it was important to talk about the amount of explanation in the articles themselves since you're offering them as a stand-alone product as well.

lol, I certainly wouldn't claim the article about "the person" is "useful." But if it gets a few people who are familiar with him to chuckle, I'll be happy about my decision to include it. I suppose it could offend someone, but it should be clear that it's not meant to be taken seriously.

Fair point about the WoF article. I probably should've clarified the format/rules somewhat, yeah. I was disappointed that you didn't like that inclusion b/c I know you're a math guy ... FWIW, if you have any interest in taking another look, you can check out the rules in the links I'm about to PM to you.

I'd change "usually isn't" to "is never." My opinion is that if you don't know which way a player is exploitable, you'll do best by making the decision(s) you think will best exploit the average player in the game you're playing (or if you know the guy's a TAG but have no reads beyond that, by making the decision[s] you think will best exploit the average TAG in the game you're playing, etc.).

Right, and that's obviously fair. Furthermore, I haven't been public with that offer until now, though I've extended it to a couple of guys who've purchased the strategy articles.

Jon I don't want to put you on the spot here, but this struck me as an odd comment. I have noticed you making ALOT of references to how you are not going to market your products compared to your competitors. I assume you are somewhat comparing yourself to me (If not I apologize). Yet this post kind of says to me "well if I'm not making alot of money, the rules will change".

First of all, what did you expect to happen????

Second, I hope I am misunderstanding something, because this message is kind of pissing me off. I have no doubt you are an awesome coach or that the product is great, but this seem like now you are wanting to have your cake and eat it too. I really respected your position on marketing, although I had a feeling it wouldn't get you very far monetarily.

I thought "Wow guys like John and Peter James must know that they aren't going to make alot of money with their marketing strategies, yet they do this anyways, we should all be more like them".

Today, you'll notice that Peter James coaching thread no longer exists......

Now your slowly backing out of your high ground position because your not making enough money???? Jon, having someone else do something unethical for your benefit is just as bad as doing it yourself, worse in fact.

If you are going to have "one or more people market things in ways that you are not comfortable", you should re-think that statement, and re-examine your moral compass, and how you present your self to the public.

Sorry, if this is not the appropriate place to post. I don't want to make a huge deal for Jon here. I did feel the need to point this out, because I don't think Jon is being fair. Basically, I am saying "Jon, pick something and stick to it"

Hello sir,

No worries about "putting me on the spot." That's more or less the reason for this thread; I'll be more than happy to field every reasonable question that gets posed to me. My hope is that this thread will focus more on the product itself than peripheral issues like pricing and marketing, but clearly I have little control over that.

I can see how that comment might've struck you as "odd" or inconsistent. Please allow me to clarify a few things.

Shrug, I wasn't comparing myself to you or anyone in particular. I hardly keep up with the goings-on of the other coaches here. I simply don't care to. I see whose threads are getting bumped constantly, I read the big NVG thread when it was active, and I occasionally check out threads other than mine for the hell of it, but that's about it.

Your feeling is way off the mark and you'd probably be better served by not making assumptions about these sorts of things. I'd also appreciate it if you'd refrain from speculating about things like this in the future, as they're none of your business. Peter's thread might not exist anymore (I wouldn't claim to know or care), but I've gotten so many students with my "strategy" (or lack thereof) that I've twice been forced to raise my rates. And SFH is selling fine.

I'm not backing out of any position. My position has always been the same, you've just apparently never understood what it is.

I've never claimed that aggressive marketing is "unethical." You're lumping me in with other individuals and assuming that my message is the same as theirs. It's not. In fact, I've never used the word "unethical" in this sort of context, and that's deliberate, as I pride myself on being quite careful with my words.

I certainly don't find aggressive marketing or high pricing to be "unethical." I believe wholeheartedly in the free market. If some guy wants to take a dump in a container, sell it for $5,000, create a thread about it on an Internet forum, and bump that thread every day to remind everyone of its existence, that's not unethical to me. Only when this hypothetical individual 1. misrepresents what he's selling and/or 2. refuses to respond honestly to a reasonable question has he crossed the line that divides ethics and lack of ethics.

The vast majority of the individuals who would sell a dump in a container for $5,000 and market it aggressively would also be dishonest about it; I suspect that that's the reason for your confusion. However, again, please note that I've never used the words "unethical" or "dishonest" in this sort of context or called any poker coach out for being such. I've used the word "uncomfortable" and stated that I prefer not to do certain things myself. That has nothing to do with ethics and everything to do with how I prefer to spend my time.

The tone of my "infomercial" is clearly aggressive (I think it's more comedic than aggressive, but it was perceived as aggressive enough by 2+2 that I was forced to replace it with a censored version). If I had an ethical issue with aggressive marketing, I obviously wouldn't have posted it at the top of the product ad in my coaching thread, lol. As is visible above, I'm not the one who created the "infomercial." I handled the technical poker aspects of it (the fabricated hand histories), but I was neither the writer of the script nor the director nor the video editor. That's not because I think this sort of thing is unethical, it's simply because it's not natural for me, and given that, I'd probably be relatively ineffective at it. Since I don't find such tactics unethical, I'd certainly have no problem hiring other individuals to handle them for me. As long as I were confident that there would be no chance of such individuals misrepresenting what I had to offer to potential customers, that sort of arrangement would be fine with me.

edit:

Again, no worries. I think your decision to post this here was appropriate and I certainly don't mind the post. As I stated above, I'd be happier if the thread were to focus on the product itself, but I'm not offended or anything. I hope my response has cleared things up for you, but you're obviously entitled to think whatever you'd like.

Isn't this the exact same informercial sales pitch YourDoom uses in the videos of his you caricature?

Disclaimer: I have no reason to think your stuff is anything other than excellent. But it does seem inconsistent to ridicule others for their tacky marketing and disingenuous sales pitches (which they often are), while saying stuff like "Im not going to market this aggressively but I can tell you respected 2+2 ers agree that I should be charging more.

If you *really* believed that, then you would in fact actually be charging more. Im sure you can see why! And if you don't really believe that, then please don't say it, as it sounds like tacky marketing speak!

Sup my man,

Hrm. Not only is it not "the exact same sales pitch," it's not even close to the same thing:

1. I parodied the fact that he was advertising his services in the comments section of nanonoko's TableRatings profile (a tactic that, to be clear, I think is laughable, though certainly not "unethical"). I've never parodied his claim that his video series provide good value, since as far as I'm concerned, there would be nothing to parody. In fact, based on what I've seen, I'd estimate that his video series would provide good value to most potential customers. I can't be sure, as A. I haven't bought either of his video series, B. the content in his previews seems "meh" to me, and C. the tiny amount of strategy writing I've seen him post on 2+2 has been terrible. Still, his products' reviews are quite good.

2. There's a huge difference between an author A. claiming that his product provides good value (as I have) and B. issuing a pseudo-threat in which he informs potential customers that he might raise his product's price at any time. The first thing is beyond standard and should be expected from every author who's confident in his product (if I didn't think my product offered good value, then I wouldn't think it would sell, and it would be priced differently). The second thing is obnoxious and perhaps even disingenuous.

This quote is unclear. I'd like you to clarify what it is that you're claiming I don't believe. My statement that respected 2+2ers have looked over the product and suggested that I charge more isn't something that I could believe or not believe. It's simply a fact. I could have them corroborate this claim if I had to.

As far as their suggesting that I charge $X and my responding by charging $X - $Y (Y > 0), that's hardly controversial and is in fact the sort of thing that should be expected. Pricing isn't an exact science, obviously. These guys thought I'd maximize my earnings by charging $X. I respect their opinions, but obviously I don't agree; thus, I decided to charge less. To be as clear as possible, my approach to pricing is relatively simple, as I have no concern for worsening the quality of the games or protecting the information within my product, as I would have if I'd created it prior to Black Friday: I priced it in a way that I estimated would make me the most money, period. Others estimated that I'd make more money with steeper pricing. Since pricing isn't "solvable," neither party is right or wrong.

As regards my strategy articles, RedJoker posted that he wasn't sure he'd "be able to recommend [them] as a stand-alone purchase in [their] current format" due to their length. That's fine, of course; he's entitled to his opinion. I posted the exact combined length of the strategy articles in my written product ad (in number of words ... to my knowledge, no other author of this sort of product is willing to do that), so it should be very obvious that I'm not looking to mislead anyone.

I countered his statement by posting that I think they provide good value despite their relative brevity and supported my stance by pointing out that other individuals have suggested that I charge more for the strategy articles than $75 (not that I should need to post it, but I'll never raise the price of any of the packages of SFH). As an aside, their suggestions didn't surprise me. While my video analyses are quite long and my strategy articles are much shorter, every component of my product is extremely "dense" (I don't waste my words), is packed with quality information, and is a result of an obsessive writing style that ensures that every message is crystal clear (a huge amount of time was spent on word choice). Winning poker is about nuance -- many a 1-bb winner likes to think the difference between his game and that of a 5-bb winner is that his game (the 1-bb winner's) has a few big leaks (if that's the case, then he has the ability to be winning at 5 bb in no time, right?), but the reality is that the culprit is almost always lots of tiny leaks -- and that means the verbal ability of the author of an educational poker product is of the utmost importance.

Admittedly, I don't have a ton of experience with the Books and Publications forum, but I must say that I find the psychology of it quite strange. Nearly every thread about an e-book or quasi-e-book seems to devolve into a relatively substance-free discussion of issues such as pricing and marketing. These things are relatively uninteresting to me, and to be honest, I find myself wondering, "Why?"

I'm willing to spend time fielding these sorts of questions to the best of my ability, as I've posted. But I'm also willing to spend time fielding questions that are more substantive about a product that 1. has a format that's never been seen before and 2. just about everyone seems to agree contains high-quality poker writing.

Shrug.

The reason that "Nearly every thread about an e-book or quasi-e-book seems to devolve into a relatively substance-free discussion of issues such as pricing and marketing" is poker is one of if only the only area I have seen such obscene pricing for material.

Your publication is no different. It seems everyone coming from the poker coaching side wants to price their publications in a coaching pricing model. You seem to be no different. Just because a few suckers bite, that still doesn't mean that poker e-book authors do not deserve to have their pricing model questioned by potential customers.

Poker is also the only area in which carefully-studied written material can help you increase your earn rate significantly relatively immediately. Poker is fundamentally different than literally every other endeavor on which written material exists because it's a pure meritocracy.

You know nothing about my publication. Have you even read the sample material? You know nothing about me. I know more about you than you do about me, lol.

People can publicly question whatever they want, obviously. That doesn't mean such questioning is "deserved," especially when it arguably detracts from substantive discussion.

I resent your implication that everyone who buys SFH is a "sucker." Do you think everyone who pays $XXX for poker coaching is also a sucker? If not, why not?

Given that I know there's no chance whatsoever that you'll purchase SFH, if you insist on continuing to post in this thread, I'm going to make a friendly request that you peruse the reviews in my coaching thread. You're baselessly implying that I'm looking to rip people off. That bothers me a little bit.

I strongly disagree with this.

I will give you one example investing.

Like poker, there is a great deal of written material on the subject. I know, I worked for one of the worlds greatest investors for several years. I also have some more than satisfying results myself, thus giving me time to play poker and post on 2+2. When carefully-studied, the written material on investing can help you increase your earn rate significantly, immediately.

You don't need to buy a $500 e-book to be successful in investing. I would suggest six books that if purchased new would cost you under a $100 and given 15 years, with the same amount of starting capitol, lets say 35k. We could take 100 of your best and brightest poker students, and I could take 100 investing students. Over 90% of my investing students if they followed my advice and, the advice in the six books would out earn your poker students with far less volatility. Sure you would have an outlier or two that will earn more, but 9 out of 10 would highly likely fall significantly short of my group. No fancy overpriced e-book needed.

"Someone posted about this exact point a few years ago regarding another one of the flavor of the month overpriced e-books.

Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth;

Even though I haven't read a word of this book, I can almost guarantee that it isn't worth its price. The reasoning is very simle.

If you have a terrific poker book, and sell it through the standard mass marketing publishing, sales can be terrific. For instance, three of our books have sales of a quarter of a million copies (or more), four of our other books have sold over 100,000 copies, and one of our more recent publications, Harrington on Cash: Volume I, which has now been out for almost a year, has just over 48,000 in sales and is still selling well.

So my point is that if this book is as good as claimed where it is actually worth the price, the authors would make far more by selling it through conventional means (and if they went with us as a publisher, assuming we would be interested in doing it, their royalties would be substantial). In addition, we would also offer the book to our foreign language publishers, where additional royalties would be received by the author. So it is difficult for me to believe that it can be worth the price.

MM"

"If you purchase a number of our books, that can also cost hundreds of dollars. So if the video site supplies you with information that is not only accurate, but dense in its presentation, then paying the amount you quote can be well worth it.

I think your problem is that you are confusing the buyer and seller. The reason we price our books at the amount we price them, and this varies some from book to book, is simply that we believe this is the price which maximizes our profits. And when I say "maximizes our profits," this includes what the author(s) will make in royalties.

So in this case, assuming the e-book in question is worth this extremely high price, I believe if it was expanded into a full sized book, the authors could make much more, and I'm talking millions of dollare in royalties over the life of the book. So either the authors don't understand this, or the book isn't worth the asking price. It's that simple.

MM"


Check out the thread.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/33...e-book-421627/

You may think I am quoting Mason out of context but I am confident the same applies to your book as well.


As for ripping people off I think again Mason will address this best. Your material may be very good but that still does not mean the material is not overpriced. Please read the bold as i think this directly applies to your publication as well.

Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth;

"Just so there is no misunderstanding, I believe these books are over priced even though I have not read them. Furthermore, because of my long experience at working in the poker/gambling authoring and poker/gambling publishing business, and being more successful at this than virtually anyone else, it's my opinion that my opinion is a very good one.

Also, just because they are over priced does not mean that the information they contain is not of value or not accurate. My suspicion is that is where you are getting confused.

And finally, assuming I'm right, we should begin to see lower priced material that is at least as good becoming available in the not to distant future. And when this happens, our opinion about being questionable will go away.

MM"