Hmm, let's see, maybe 5-10% of the money goes in pre, and the rest goes in post. what is going to be more useful to a new player, having them memorise a bunch of charts and then hanging them out to dry, or actually teaching them the basics of how to play post?

Someone wrote nearly 20 years ago "Nobody's going to get it wrong with QQ+, AK. Nobody's going to get it wrong with 72, T4, 35 or 80% of the crap in the deck either. If a newbie's getting it wrong with the hands in between, they're not getting it very wrong by much so who cares". Still seems applicable to me. For a new player, keep stuff simple - preflop strat should be "Like your cards? Raise. Don't like your cards? Fold. Unsure? Check position/action then decide". That's probably less words than you have charts, and probably more useful to a new player than overwhelming them a ring binder full of pretty coloured pictures because solvers

Preflop charts are so easy as like poem at achool, as much as anyone could say, those charts will put you on 50% the right way of not making mistakes. But player should first understand of why something is done, then it would be easy to do something you would know vs how to react against villain next move.

When I first started playing poker the first poker book that I read was a book by Phil Hellmuth, the self professed greatest player in the world, with a record number of World Series of Poker Gold Bracelets.

His advice was to play the top 10 hands pre flop. Obviously terrible, terrible advice that would get you killed in today's online games.

When you start you don't really know about defending frequencies in the big blind, or 3 betting ranges on the button.

If you memorise pre flop charts, I think it gives you an edge straight away amongst most other players in the game.

A lot of your winrate in poker comes from opening hands pre flop and just taking down the blinds.

I remember around 2010 if you raised in the small blind vs big blind villan would fold like 70 percent of the time. It was ridiculous. It was free money.

It really takes a lifetime to learn post flop. It's infinitely complicated depending on flops, turns, rivers and the kind of player you are playing against.

You can learn a GTO pre flop strategy in a couple of days that you can build your entire strategy around, right from the beginning.

If you build a house it needs a solid beginning foundation.

Nice argument

So what you are saying is that giving these books to a beginner will not help them improve? I get what you are getting at in the end. And yes, these books are not going to make anyone a GTO specialist. But I think we are looking at giving a brand new player a good foundation to learn poker. If you are saying that a beginner cannot beat micros or low stakes after reading and digesting the information in these books you are wrong.

Do you think it's better to throw Modern Poker Theory at a beginner to get a good foundation of the game?

Yes, looked at on an overall spectrum, poker has changed since they were written. But to say that beginners won't get better by reading these books are a mistake. Should they be the bible of playing as they once were? No. But they still have value even in today's market.

I still beleive poker is learned according to Sklansky's multi level thinking theory. Player learn to play their cards first. Then they learn how to integrate their hand verse their opponent's range. Then they learn how to play range versus range. Then it goes deeper when you start playing exploitative range versus exploitative range and construct counter-exploits to their exploits.

Harrington on Hold'em is a great series to cover the first couple steps on this ladder of improvement. It is when they get to the level of playing range versus range that GTO starts to become important in their development and HoH is going to start falling short in the person's development at that stage.

Hi jjpregler:

This is a very good post.

I sometimes play the $1-$3 no-limit at The Bellagio. On a good night there will be a dozen of these games or more, and virtually every player that I play against would benefit from these books, and some of them would benefit a lot (and this includes the player who recently asked me which hand was better, a flush or three-of-a-kind). And this statement is true for virtually all the small stakes no-limit games in Las Vegas.

My best guess is that a player who understands and is able to apply well what's in these book would average between $150 and $200 a day, and that's after rake and reasonable tipping.

Mason

Limping is just bad and not a good advice for beginners at all…

Then you are going to hate GTO:



12% limping range.

"Limping is Pimping" - Daniel Negreanu 1/4/2023

You are on slippery ground when solvers are starting to find spots where it is better for the range to have a limping strategy and one of the best playeres is now employing a limp strategy at times.

I get what you are saying in that in overwhelming number of spots RFI is better. But just be careful with the "never open limp" advice because that is now wrong and we have mathematical evidence for that.

For a beginner its 100% better to never limp as to try to implement a 12% limping range….

As I already wrote - its a big piece of poker history but its outdated….

Not necessarily, and especially in small stakes games against poor players. See The Theory of Poker Applied to No-Limit by David Sklansky for more discussion.

Mason

The Theory of Poker Applied to No-Limit was published less than four years ago, so the idea of limping and when it might be right to do it is not the ancient history that you imply.

https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Poker-...sr=1-1-catcorr

Mason

Limping AK UTG is just bad - everyone saying something else in 2023 has no idea from poker.

I just finished modern poker thoery (skip the tournament part), i think the preflop part is pretty good, but the flop and turn ones are not really helpful.

Modern Poker Theory is more like an analyst's report. Has plenty value but people talking about it being a poker bible, not for me. Both Janda books for instance are far more memorable.

If you had to choose between Harrington's books or Ed Miller's "Small Stakes NLH", which one would you recommend?