Lol I assume it was you

Just seemed weird to trot it out considering online is more or less dead and is a completely different animal anyway. Has nothing to catering to sensibilities whatever that entails.

Put another way, if I’m buying a book on basket weaving I wouldn’t care if the author was a bad cook

Edit to add: So we need to see if Sklansky is a charlatan? The guy wrote the Theory of Poker 45 years ago. I think he has the skillet to author a book about beating the games filled with the worst poker players in any room. Now we wait to see what the book actually says.

Here we go with the analogies.

It's not that different. A lot of live players are fish and have similar tendencies to online fish so we can learn how they play through population data.

The only people who think online is dead are the people who could never beat online, it's classic cognitive dissonance.

Online is dead because it’s dead. There were many people who weren’t that interested in it to begin with and now that the US has more or less stopped it the corpse has no pulse.

But this is a book about 1/3 nlh live written by two brilliant authors with maybe a century of experience combined experience playing the kind of dopes that frequent low limit poker in card rooms. I’m sure they can handle it.

I find this entire thread bizarre.

I’m sure he told you that but he’s wrong.

Yes a good player can make $25 an hr playing 1/3 for 40hrs a week

You can win way more playing 2/5

Your friend is an idiot

Keep in mind that the guy who wrote The Theory of Poker forty-five years ago also wrote Tournament Poker for Advanced Players twenty-odd years ago. Not every swing is a hit.

My review of the sample hands presented by OP is up!

First!

Not sure what this means, am I missing something about TAP? I’ve read both versions, it’s a good book.

But back to main point, it was comedy gold when that first Smarty Pants came charging in claiming Sklansky didn’t understand implied odds when he was talking to the guy who coined the term 45 years ago.

And then they kept coming in swarms after that.

And we are talking about an introduction book to the lowest stakes there is. Written by two extremely smart guys with maybe 100 years of experience playing against the various types of bad players that frequent these games.

So again, it’s a bizarre thread

Bart Hanson's video is a total negative review.

I plan on reading the book and seeing if it is useful or as bad as some people's impression from the introduction.

I got the Miller book because it was recommended here. I am working on my live NLHE cash game. I never really got into it, but it is such a high percentage of what is spread. Played some 2/5 like 10 years ago, and beat it but wasn't comfortable with it. Had trouble adjusting to the loose play at 1/2.

People like to say this pretty often, but I would say if anything it's probably the opposite.

Being successful in business has a ton of different skill sets that require soft skills and different forms of intelligence that many high stakes players would actually lack.
A lot are socially awkward introverts that are actually dumb and naive when it comes to anything outside of poker or strategy games.

For many people this is definitely true.

If they want to do that ill be their 1st coach. i gave 100% the correct way to play the "controversial" KK hand instantly and no one else has even sniffed at it. if they want "counter" off the wall ways to play hands against fish that is 100% correct and not "lol wrong" ive got a milllon of them. while i would never say im the worlds best poker player i will safely say i make more money off fishy players than any baller gto pro ive ever sat with!!

Love the discussion in here. I look forward to reading the book and hearing what everyone thinks about it. The video by Bart was good. I applaud the authors for putting something out there that is not cookie cutter what the rest of the poker community believes in. All the people criticisizing these guys like they are stupid (not saying Bart did that) is funny, i imagine both these guys have more intelligence than all but a few posting in the threads. Whether that translates to a great book is TBD once we get to read all the pages.

Also would love to see that call in show limon. Barts call in show is the best, but a little variety never hurt. Maybe set up a future show where you both comment at the same time. Donate your time to Barts company for a few beers and good press.

you know i originally did the first poker call in show ever at CLP!! lololol. at the time i dont think bart "got it". he gets it now!!! I doubt bart wants to go through that again and we live on different sides of the country.

Thats great. Most of the best podcasts I listen to have people who live on opposite sides of the country going back and forth. Fans would love it, especially unscripted and with hands not talked about prior to starting the show.

They're employing the early 2000s stack a donk strategy. Still quite effective if you meet the requirement of having enough of the right player types at your table. i.e. passive pre flop and pay off wizards post flop.

This is untrue. Global Poker is phenomenal.

So far from the truth. There’s probably a thousand online pros making 6 figures a year

This is not the flex you think it is.

Bart ,got a sub from me just based off this video that made me lol .

i plan to be driving a lot in the next couple months and most interested in your podcast and call in videos.
what's the best way to listen to them on an android device.

also anyway its available for use with roku ?

thanks again , i responded on twitter too so just answer on one when you can.

You mentioned QQ,KK,AA earlier in this context too. Doesn’t this contradict the concept of the limp reraise? Perhaps I should ask, how do you reconcile the two concepts?

wait is that true? if so that shorrible. how do you get above water in those games unless oure mega crushhing stacking?

they sold it... new owners just being nice l

In the KK hand, does Sklansky still fold the flop if he has the K

You are wrong for this reason. Everything you choose to do in life is a matter of opportunity cost. What's the cost of me engaging this activity instead of that activity?

For you, playing 1/3 obviously doesn't make sense, because you have so many better options for making money. But that's obviously not true for a great deal of people.

No one is arguing that 1/3 pros are making bank, though I would argue that on certain times depending how's your local 2/5, it might be a more profitable game. But for some people playing 1/3 is a better option than the ones they have. Or the preferable option to something of equal value like driving for Uber or delivering pizzas. For other's it's where they start their poker journey. For people like me, it's what I play when I am on a downswing on 2/5. For others it's a profitable hobby. And for most even those who lose, a chance to do something different from their recreation options, to blow off steam, to socialize with people from all walks of life.

FWIW, a few years ago, I have tried calculating how much rake I was paying to the casino at 2.5 and it was something like $12 an hour IIRC. 1/3 should be similar, though obviously the $12 represents a bigger portion of your win rate. I also have records of the money I am making on promotions and I am making $5-6 an hour on those. Obviously your mileage may vary based on the rake of your casino and the promotions they run.