When I come up with examples I have to walk a tightrope. They aren't good teaching tools if the answer is obvious. They need to be situations where a lot of players would choose the wrong alternative. On the other hand if I choose a debatable example I can't be careless lest I overlook something that would change the right answer. As mentioned, I was careless in this case because I didn't make hero's hand have no backdoor straight draws.

On the point about complaining about too much limit talk.....I don't get that at all.

Dear 2+2,

Thank you for allowing me to review this book. I’ll try to not to write a novel of my own in this thread, but I wanted to break down my review in a few different sections in order to articulate my feedback on this book.

Here’s the TLDR version of my review:

5/5 Stars – The MSRP on the cover says $34.95. I believe the book is worth that amount and I would recommend this to intermediate/advanced players.

Before I get into some detailed feedback, here's a little blurb about me:

I’m someone who has played card games for nearly 3 decades. About 20 years ago, I stumbled upon 2+2 books in the game section of my local bookseller. While I own multiple 2+2 publications, I haven’t purchased a 2+2 book in nearly 10 years.

Over the past 10 years, my poker studies have come in the form of training sites, reviewing hands w/ peers, etc. As I’ve gotten older and the poker boom has waned, poker has become a recreational hobby.

Nonetheless, I still enjoy playing the game and I try to do it at a high level. Here’s my review on the book.

The Pros of “The Theory of Poker Applied to No Limit”

If you are an intermediate/experienced poker player, I think you’ll enjoy this book. The chapters are short, but the paragraphs are packed with concepts that you can use in your very next session. Most chapters can be completed in 15-20 minutes.

I really liked the index at the front of the book because you can rapidly thumb through the index and find a section that you can utilize in your next poker session.

Perhaps you have just played a session and found a weakness in your game? For example, did you bet too big on the turn, did you bet to small on the flop?

The book isn’t designed to give you exact answers; This book helps you think about poker from a mathematical and intellectual perspective.

If you are an advanced player, you probably know all about the concepts laid out in this book. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t buy it. On the contrary, this book is evergreen in the sense that you could buy the book today and re-read the concepts 20 years later and still get something from the material.

For the reason alone, I’ll likely re-read this book and treat it as “Go-to” reference point for many of my tactics in no-limit in the future.

Humans can know and understand a concept, but sometimes, reading about a specific concept and seeing a situation from a different perspective can help you get to that “Ah-hah” moment. When you can think about no limit poker games from a perspective that’s solid in practicality, as well as math, I think you’ll be well on your way to being successful as a poker player.

That was the biggest gain from me regarding this book. I wouldn’t even consider this book a way to “Get back to the basics.” The book goes much deeper than basic poker concepts. The book doesn’t teach you what to think about poker, it teaches you how to think about poker.

The Cons of “The Theory of Poker Applied to No Limit”

It was hard for me to find a con for this book. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and thought the concepts were laid out in a logical and mathematically sound fashion.

Intermediate players may find themselves re-reading the paragraphs over and over. In fact, when I looked on Amazon at the review’s others had left for this book, one of the 1-star reviews made this very point. The reviewer said that they found themselves re-reading various paragraphs over and over.

To be honest, I think the author may have intended this. I also found myself re-reading some of the paragraphs in the book. From a grammatical standpoint, the book seemed fine. The sentences flowed and imagery made sense.

However, many of the concepts require you to think about the what the author is trying to illustrate and sometimes, I found myself putting the book down in order to think about the concept. Then, I found myself re-reading these concepts over and over to be sure I was thinking about the situation in the proper way.

While some may see this as a con, I think of it as the author providing value to the reader. I wouldn’t pay $34.95 for a book that’s full of fluff. This book is dense with methodologies to help you think about poker correctly. Anyone who buys this book, with the intention of reading it once and letting it collect dust on the shelves, isn’t getting the most value out of this book.

Other Thoughts

With all my feedback listed above, I went on Amazon to see if there was an Audiobook version of this book available. I love the way the information is laid out in print but I think I’d get just as much value, if not more, by being able to listen to this book in the car or listen while I am in the gym.

Perhaps it doesn’t make good financial sense to pay a narrator to read this book, but I think I could absorb the concepts easier by hearing them over and over versus reading the book, flipping through pages, etc.

I can expound or go into more detail, but this review is already approaching 1,000 words. Let me know if I have said anything in this review that you’d want me to follow up on. Please forgive any of my grammar or spelling errors! Thanks again 2+2!

If we still haven't received our book, did it get lost? I know media mail is slow sometimes but would have figured it to have arrived by this point.

Thanks for the kind words.

I have it. Bought it a long time ago. The introduction very kind. I love how you give so much gratitude. The rest a little complicated for my mind as I am not that analytical but will take it piece by piece.

Hi numberonedonk

I sent you a PM.

Best wishes,
Mason

As long as you are offering, I would be interested in your comments on how some of the specific subjects are covered in the book.

Like others, I was given a copy of the new "The Theory of Poker." In return, I was asked to provide a review of the book. As background, I have been playing poker recreationally, but seriously for 15 years. I was a day one poster in the Live Low Stakes NL (LLSNL) forum and have been a moderator there for many years.

This will be a "grunch" review, which means that no other reviews have been read before posting this one. Since I am confident that other posters have already praised or damned the advice given (this is 2+2 after all), little time is going to be put in it by me. Instead, I'm going to look where it fits in for a poker player and the organization of the book itself.

This is a book that anyone who wants to commit to studying poker should own. Like the first edition, you will get more out of it as you progress in your knowledge of poker. Things that seemed to be, "sure, I got that" become more complex, such as the discussion on implied odds illustrates. Many posters in LLSNL equate implied odds to the amount in the villain's stack divided by the call size, for example. Adding your own notes and using it as a reference would make good use of the book. Going through it to confirm what you think a term means is another good use.

As such, this shouldn't be the first poker book one buys. The vast majority of poker books and trainings are prescriptive. Here's what you should play pre-flop. On the flop, if condition X, then you do Y with Z range of hands. There's nothing wrong with those books or trainings in general and for a beginner, that's what most want. This book is for the person who wants to take the next step and understand the game from first principals.

As for the book structure itself, the decision to keep the same chapters in the same order is understandable. It made the book easier to re-write and allows those interested to compare and contrast the older version. Adding in the key points section is a big improvement. However, the book was a disjointed mess when it was published and it remains so today. I have forgotten which book the author and editor admitted that they weren't good writers but asked people to take the ideas as good. After 40 years, they should be better at it. It remains about 35 articles of separate material that is only loosely tied together. Using limit and 2-7 lowball examples are almost useless since the vast majority of players have no clue how those games are played.

I would have brought up the Game Theory portion and made that the opening chapters. Declaring that the old hand reading, deceptive pro is as doomed as the dinosaurs at high stakes poker would have given the book an initial charge. Instead, the author and editor buried the lead. It would have been a more interesting book and I believe it would have lead the author into new passages on some classic concepts.

Thank you for that review. I do however want to explain why I sometimes use examples from games that I realize are not often played. It is a teaching technique that I have been very successful with over the years whether I am teaching poker, other gambling, or math.
I have found that if I give a second example of a concept in a different setting it helps the student hone in on exactly how that concept works. So if I am showing someone that the easiest way to multiply by nine in your head is to multiply the number by ten and then subtract the number. I will, as a second example ask how much 73x 99 is.

Please do not hesitate to bring up any of the specific subjects in the book that you might have questions or comments about. And of course that goes for those who actually bought the book as well.

Only fifty pages in, just hit more time to read so probably get through it this week. Solid so far and would probably be very valuable for players that are just starting to think about GTO and poker theory in general who main big bet games. Will give more thoughts upon completion but initial impression is that it's another super solid addition. I consider NLHTP to be kind of the bible of NL when a player wants to go from enthusiast to thinking about the game in a more solid way and I think this would be a natural next step for them after reading NLHTP (though professional NL vol 1 is a good follow up as well to start thinking about different concepts)

Getting nice reviews. For the first fifty pages. For some reason posters are writing their thoughts at that point but almost no one has said anything about the 251 pages that come after that. Even though it is those pages that I think contain the best stuff. I know some of it requires careful reading, but its worth it.

About halfway through here - have plenty to say but would like to finish it first

Mason, thank you for the book.

David, thank you for writing it.

I hadn't played live poker in 16 months until I sat in a pair of ring games at Wynn over the weekend. I was noticeably rusty and ultimately lost. However, the section on semi-bluffing resonated with me greatly and came in handy when I found myself in EP with a draw. I also applied the same logic when *I* was check-raised by a thinking player in EP and correctly deduced he was drawing.

Perhaps it's a sign of me growing old of poker, or a sign of me not being involved with poker for 16 months, but I didn't cruise through this book like I did with David's TPFAP many years ago. I'm definitely not a math person, and while I tried to understand the many equations David put into the book, I ultimately wound up skipping past it. I also found a lot of the book wordy when it could have been more concise.

I am very confident that a math-minded poker enthusiast will love all of this book. I myself enjoyed the easy-to-understand parts and took several takeaways and already applied it to my limited exposure back to poker. For that I thank you, David.

Actually it is rarely necessary to follow the equations. They are there for those who want to double check how I reach a conclusion. Eg a $200 bet gives you a $30 EV while a $150 bet is an EV of $40 because he will call with x % more hands. If you trust me its no big deal to skip them.

I used up all my will power trying to not post this clip but ultimately failed.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...tail&FORM=VIRE

LMAOOOOO okay okay point taken

I 100% will read it, I'm a teacher and we just got out for the summer so I'll be through it very quickly. I am excited to continue and will update (maybe every 50 pages lol)

I think I should reverse my admonition to read the whole book before commenting. Many of you who took advantage of the free promotion were probably not yet at the stage where you would normally be reading a book like this. So I shouldn't expect you to get through the whole thing before commenting or asking questions.

First off, I’d like to thank Mason for sending me the free book and David for putting in the large effort to write it.

The Good: I loved the chapter on Check/Raising. Of all the “basic” plays in NL I’ve always felt this was the hardest to apply in situations other than read based bluffs and value raises when I’ve flopped huge and the player on my left is likely to bet. Sklansky gives some good examples of when to and when not to use check raises in non-obvious situations. The hand example I struggled understanding most in this chapter I turned into a thread on the LLSNL subforum here. Feel free to chime in. (I changed the stakes and suits to avoid getting sniffed out).

I also loved the chapter “Various Bonus Thoughts.” This chapter consists of blurbs about very non-basic plays, and some of the tactics mentioned blew my poker mind. I would bet I’m not the only experienced player who has given little to no thought about tactics like making tiny bets into pots and value betting draws h/u in position against a fish with a big stack. In the latter case, I would always take a free card instead of trying to “bluff” a calling station, and didn’t realize until I read the chapter that I was leaving +EV on the table by not betting.

There are other good chapters as well, and how much benefit one derives from good chapters like: “The Ante Structure,” “Pot Odds” and “Appendix C” will depend a lot on an individual’s experience level and the particular games they play. Overall, these positive attributes make the book worth the price printed on the cover.


The Bad: ToPA2NL takes a left turn at page 148 and from that point on it mostly deals either directly or indirectly with game theory. Sklansky often uses rigorous breakdowns of toy poker games to explain these concepts, but in many cases the toy poker games are so far from how poker is actually played in a live setting that imo following the advice in these chapters will cause most players to lose money. For example, on page 164 Sklansky explains how a player with a polarized range who bets 1/3 of the pot on the river should be called 3/4 of the time so that the bettor’s bluffs will break even. In GTO world this is logical. However, one of the hallmarks of many live 2/5 games and virtually all live NLHE games smaller than that is that big river bets almost always represent a real hand. These stakes represent over 95% of the poker that is spread in casinos, and calling at a rate anywhere resembling the advice in this example, even against bettors with polarized ranges, is a heavily losing proposition.

I haven’t played online poker for a number of years, and I rarely play live higher than 2/5, so incorporating GTO strategies into one’s game may very well be beneficial for people who play online or at 5/10 and up live. For the stakes I typically play a better strategy than GTO influenced play is to just look for a soft game, sit in it, and capitalize off the large mistakes soft opponents make.

The Ugly: ToPA2NL is not a casual read, even in comparison to other poker books. The “Key Points” mitigate the density of the chapters somewhat, especially in the earlier chapters, but beginning with the Game Theory chapter on page 148, this is tough sledding even with the Key Points. There are also some grammatical errors in the text.

Overall: Studying ToPA2NL has no doubt improved my poker game. Overall I recommend it, although I also recommend not putting too much weight into the game theory aspects.

Just my opinion...

Thank you for that review. I am however surprised that you did not realize that the book advocates that GTO should be abandoned in many different situations such as the one you mentioned.

I didn't want to post a filibuster, so I tried to be concise in my review. Lest there is any confusion, David is quite clear in the text that he doesn't advocate attempting to play a GTO strategy outside of the highest of stakes or multitabling online. However, the book does advocate learning the GT concepts to make one's game better. My issue was that the extensive toy games were too far removed from reality for the concepts to be profitably integrated into an exploitive strategy.

As to the example I gave, reading your post and rereading the relevant portion of the text, the fact that a motivated and (I like to think) reasonably intelligent reader like myself could come to such an apparently erroneous conclusion is imo evidence that my criticisms of the book are valid. YMMV.

I don't want to turn this into a pissing match. Overall I liked and recommend the book, but...

I guess if you read the words you cited in a vacuum you would come to the conclusion that I was claiming GTO river calling strategy was the "correct" strategy. But the rest of the book makes it clear I don't think that. Actually the opposite is true. I think modern day poker experts have too high an opinion of GTO because they are multi tabling, playing heads up, or playing high stakes live games against very good opponents.

Hi David, I am fairly sure I have found an "error" (with quotation marks) in an PLO example (not the nut flush earlier stated). Im sending you an PM about it