For whatever it's worth, I believe I can actually get behind this attitude. No reason not to work on short-handed play. Every now and then at a juicy $4/$8 table there will inexplicable pots where only 2 or 3 people see the flop. Knowing the best play to make in those rare situations can only help the old winrate.

Out of curiosity has anyone read the latest edition of Limit Hold'em for Advanced Players? If so, is there anything in it that could help one's game in juicy lowstakes games full of bad players? I've been wanting to buy it but the pricetag is pretty high. But if it'll pay for itself when I play a few pots differently I'm up for that.

Yup little to high for my taste as well .
I will buy it eventually when special arrives or CA$ stop tanking vs US$

I guess I would be very surprised if there's anything in the book that will meaningfully add to what you will have already seen in past books and from reading posts in this forum.

I read it. I didn't find it something I went back to again and again like SSHE. I am rereading The Intelligent Poker Player by Phillip Newall which is rereadable as it has some nice ideas and concepts are both interesting and thought provoking.

On the subject of LHE books, I'm wondering what do you guys think of the book ''Limit Hold'em: winning short-handed strategies'' by Terry Borer and Lawrence Mak? I remember getting this book from the Pokerstars Store with my frequent player points ages ago before the year 2010 when I first started playing online.

I never hear anyone talking about this book anywhere on this forum. I think it's ok, not great though, lots of outdated advice also.

Winning in tough hold em games is definitely superior. I don’t think the advice is horrible though and I like the presentation of the book. Honestly if you followed the book’s advice you’d probably win in all but the toughest 20/40 games (which probably aren’t worth playing in anyway).

One of the plays described in the book that I don't think I've ever been in a position to even try is raising a river bet when you think you can beat the better but the overcallers behind you might have you beat.

It seems like an extremely rare play. I'm not sure I've ever encountered a 4/8 villain who would bet into 3 other people on the river without at least top pair. And villains who would fold 2 pair or better to a river raise, especially once the pot is as big as it would be when there are 4+ villains left on the river, are a rare bird as well.

Has anyone EVER encountered an opportunity where raising a river bet to your right to try to fold better hands behind you was the right play?

I meant to comment on The Intelligent Poker Player, Winning in tough hold em games and Limit Hold'em: winning short-handed strategies but it looks like I forgot.

I played in tough, short-handed LHE games, mostly on Bovada and some on Merge, for a short time. My "feedback" on those books has to be taken with a grain of salt because I find short-handed LHE play boring as bleep. I don't even remotely enjoy it.

But based on what little I remember, TIPP was the best of the 3 books, but the other 2 weren't particularly far behind. Even when the books disagree about the right play in a right situation they JUSTIFY their arguments, so the reader can think it through and decide for themselves which is correct.

The bottom line in short-handed play is that even though the villains aren't making the worst mistakes (i.e. playing too many starting hands, cold-calling too many preflop raises, and chasing draws they don't have odds for), they're making SOME mistakes, i.e. overdefending or underdefending their blind, c-betting too much or too little, bluffing the turn too much or not often enough etc. A good short-handed LHE book will go through the math to show what the correct frequency should be in a given situation and give you tips on how to exploit it if the villain's frequency seems wrong.

TIPP perhaps did the best job of introducing the reader to GTO - if you don't know your opponent but suspect he's a tough player, you can play GTO, and even if that doesn't help you win the MAXIMUM from your opponent, at least it helps HIM not exploit YOU while you start building up reads about his weaknesses and put together a plan to attack those.

I hope that helps, but looking back it it just seems like a blinding flash of the obvious

Yes: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...35/?highlight=

I think I did this once or twice back in the day when I played with people I knew very well. When I was almost certain the first player was bluffing and that the other player was very unlikely to call two bets.

I've done similar on the turn as well.

I will say a good shorthanded game live is some of the most profitable poker to be had. Massive mistakes. I’ve brought myself back from some big losses playing shorthanded.

Plus it just gives you more reps at really playing which helps your full ring game imo.

Agree. Short handed play is super volatile and mentally demanding, but it’s also fun, very profitable if you know what you’re doing (and run well), and definitely not boring.

The one thing I would add here is that you are not targeting hands like two pair. The goal is to get someone who tries to play well (think break even regulars or good-but-not-great TAG recreational players) to fold a strong one pair hand. You also need the bettor to be either a spaz or someone who value bets super, super thinly. You probably will never get this combo at a 4/8 game, but this dynamic will very occasionally come up in midstakes games.

Yeah, truly don't get the "short handed is boring" take. You play more hands and the ranges are generally wider. I think it is only boring if what you find fun about poker is dragging huge, multiway pots.