The Theory of Poker: A Professional Poker Player Teaches You How To Think Like One

by David Sklansky, Roger Dionne, Brian Arens (Narrator)

This audio edition of David Sklansky's classic discusses theories and concepts applicable to nearly every variation of the game, including five-card draw (high), seven-card stud, hold 'em, lowball draw, and razz (seven-card lowball stud).

This audiobook introduces you to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, its implications, and how it should affect your play. Other chapters discuss the value of deception, bluffing, raising, the slow-play, the value of position, psychology, heads-up play, game theory, implied odds, the free card, and semibluffing. Many of today's top poker players will tell you that this is the book that really made a difference in their play. That is, these are the ideas that separate the experts from the typical players. Those who listen to and study this content will literally leave behind those who don't, and most serious players relisted multiple times. This is the best audiobook ever created on poker.

This audio edition of The Theory of Poker is skillfully narrated by Brian Arens, a listener favorite, and includes brand new commentary from the author.

Produced and published by Echo Point Books & Media, an independent bookseller in Brattleboro, Vermont.

PLEASE When you purchase this title, the accompanying PDF will be available in your Audible Library along with the audio.

Genres: Nonfiction, Games, Reference, Psychology, Sports, Unfinished, Finance

Audible Audio

First published January 1, 1983

About the author

Sklansky was born and raised in Teaneck, New Jersey, where he graduated from Teaneck High School in 1966.[2] He attended the University of Pennsylvania, but left before graduation. He returned to Teaneck and passed multiple Society of Actuaries exams by the time he was 20, and worked for an actuarial firm.[3]

Sklansky is generally considered[by whom?] a top authority on gambling. He has written many books on poker, blackjack, and general gambling.

Sklansky has won three World Series of Poker bracelets, two in 1982 ($800 Mixed Doubles, and $1000 Draw Hi) and one in 1983 ($1000 Limit Omaha Hi). He also won the Poker By The Book invitational event on the 2004 World Poker Tour, outlasting Phil Hellmuth Jr, Mike Caro, T. J. Cloutier, and Mike Sexton, and then finally overcoming Doyle Brunson.[4]

Sklansky attended the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania for a year before leaving to become a professional gambler.[5] He briefly took on a job as an actuary before embarking into poker. While on the job he discovered a faster way to do some of the calculations and took that discovery to his boss. The boss told him he could go ahead and do it that way if he wanted but wouldn’t pass on the information to the other workers. "In other words, I knew something no one else knew, but I got no recognition for it," Sklansky is quoted as saying in Al Alvarez's The Biggest Game in Town. "In poker, if you're better than anyone else, you make immediate money. If there's something I know about the game that the other person doesn't, and if he's not willing to learn or can't understand, then I take his money."

Sklansky resides in Henderson, Nevada.

Reviews

[Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

No offense to Doyle Brunson and his Super System, but Sklansky's Theory of Poker is The Poker Player's Bible. This is truly the fundamentals.

You'll learn all kinds of stuff if you've never really studied or thought deeply about the game. If you've only ever played hold'em tournaments with your friends, you'll learn even more. If you've only ever watched World Poker Tour and World Series of Poker events on television, you'll be astounded by how much the commentators couldn't possibly attempt to discuss. Just about everything you need to know to get started is in this book--lacking bankroll management, very little personal psychological advice, etc--but those topics don't belong underneath the theoretical umbrella of this work.

If you want to understand the game of poker, start by reading this. Play more and try to remember what happened in your last session and what in the book did/didn't jibe with your experience. Talk with other players--preferably people who seem better than you. Repeat these steps until you're done playing poker.

[Stephen · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 to 5.0 stars. In my opinion, the single best book ever written on practical poker theory and strategy. Clear, consise and very translatable from the page to the poker table. Highly Recommended (at least for poker players).

[Федор Кривов · Rating 4 out of 5]

Много полезного:

Фундаментальная Теорема покера утверждаёт, что лучшая тактика - это играть так, как будто вы знаете карты оппонентов. Каждый раз, когда игрок видит карты противника при вскрытии и говорит «если б я только знал, что у него, я бы, конечно, играл по-другому», этот
игрок сажает себя и приносит (или спасает) деньги своим партнёрам.
Многие хорошие игроки полагают, что блеф имеет отрицательное математическое ожидание. Они рассматривают его как форму заявки, которая приведёт к тому, что с ними будут уравниваться, когда у них на самом деле будет лучшая рука. Однако я полагаю, что чистый блеф имеет матожидание не хуже нулевого, что объясняется гораздо более детально в следующей главе. В то же время я согласен с тем, что блеф - один из
важнейших компонентов стратегии игрока. Если вы никогда не блефуете, оппоненты будут знать, что если вы ставите, значит, у вас в руке что-то есть. Они будут играть
сообразно силе вашей руки, что им в плюс, а вам в минус, сообразно Фундаментальной Теореме Покера.
Как мы видели, полублеф может быть выгоден, поскольку иногда он действует как блеф (если оппонент скидывается на лучшей руке), а иногда позволяет вам совершенствовать свою комбинацию до лучшей (когда оппонент уравнивает ставку). Совокупность этих
обстоятельств и делает полублеф выгодным мероприятием. Поэтому важно запомнить, что обычно не стоит использовать полублеф, если вы уверены, что вас уравняют. Почему?
Потому что тогда аспект блефа в вашей ставке исчезает,вы ставите только для подъёма банка, а это заведомо неверно - класть больше денег в банк на несовершенной руке.
Также рекомендуется пореже применять полублеф, когда ваше слово последнее, в особенности если много игроков спасовали перед вами. Тогда появляется возможность не
только получить бесплатную карту на последней позиции, но также не исключено, что кто-то перед вами намеренно ставил мало на сильной руке, а потом спасует и поднимет ставку, когда вы поставите. В противоположность этому, когда вы в первой позиции, более резонно делать ставку на полублефе. Поскольку вы не можете обеспечить себе бесплатную карту на первой позиции, вы можете перейти к агрессивным действиям и ставить по ситуации.
Повторяясь, скажем: если вы подозреваете, что оппонент, возможно, полублефует, вам всё равно нужно сброситься на большинстве раскладов - как при паре 9-к ранее в этой
главе. Однако если у вас рука, на которой можно уравняться, в большинстве случаев следует поднять ставку. Это одна из многих ситуаций в покере, когда сбрасывание не оптимальный вариант, подъём ставки лучше всего, а уравнивание - наихудший из трёх возможных.
В свободной игре лучше поменьше баловаться блефом и полублефом, зато приударить на нормальной руке.
Меньше блефуйте, больше ставьте «до кучи». Также чаще уравнивайтесь и смелее играйте на незавершёнках. В жёсткой игре можно вольготнее использовать блеф и
полублеф, но ужесточить требования к нормальной руке. Блефуйте больше, до кучи ставьте меньше. Также реже уравнивайтесь и быстрее сдавайтесь на недостроенных
комбинациях.
Слоуплей декларирует слабость, когда вы сильны, блеф же демонстрирует силу, когда вы слабы.
Чтобы убедиться в важности блефа, представьте, что вы сражаетесь с противником, который в последнем круге поставил $20 в $100 банк. Шансы банка у вас будут 6 к 1, если вы уравняете эту ставку. Однако вы знаете, что, как часто бывает, вы можете выиграть только если оппонент блефует. Предположим, вы хорошо знаете трёх своих соперников. Первый никогда не блефует в такой ситуации, так что ответ на ставку этого игрока прост: вы сбросите свои карты с полной уверенностью, что не упустили здесь ни одного цента. Второй опонент часто блефует. И вновь ответ прост: вы уравниваетесь, зная, что
выиграете эту последнюю ставку на длинной дистанции. Третий игрок проблематичен. Он ставит обычно так, что шансы против того, что он блефует, примерно 6 к 1. На самом деле можно заранее сказать, что если он делает ставку, он блефует один раз из семи. Если вы идете на чистый блеф в начале торгов и кто-то поднимает вас, не пытайтесь упорствовать. Вы на крючке. Шансов нет, так что даже не думайте продолжать борьбу.
Оставьте эту затею и попытайте счастья в следующий раз.
Используя теорию игр для принятия решения, стоит ли блефовать, вы должны определить шанса банка, которые получает оппонент, если вы делаете ставку, и затем
случайно блефануть таким образом, чтобы шансы против вашего блефа были равны или почти равны шансам банка вашего оппонента. Если оппонент получит 5 к 1, шансы
против вашего блефа должны быть 5 к 1. Играя таким образом, вы не оставляете оппоненту ни одного спасительного решения. Что бы он ни делал - уравнивался или сбрасывался, на длинной дистанции результат его будет таким же, либо ещё хуже.
При использовании теории игр для принятия решения, стоит ли уравнивать возможный блеф - в предположении, что ваша карта может побить только блеф, и никаких намеков для разгадки нет, - вы должны в первую очередь определить шансы, которые оппонент получает на блефе. Сделайте отношение ваших уравниваний к сбросам таким же, как эти шансы. Если оппонент получает на блефе шансы 4 к 1, вы должны рандомизированно уравняться четыре из пяти раз, чтобы сделать этот блеф невыгодным. Обычно следует провоцировать блеф у игроков, которые уже поблефовали достаточно, и тормозить блеф партнёров, которые и так блефуют слишком мало.
В первом случае вам придётся уравняться, если оппонент сделает ставку. Провоцируя блеф, вы увеличиваете свои шансы выиграть эту последнюю взятку, поскольку оппонент вместе с блефом будет ставить на большем количестве комбинаций, которые вы сможете побить - без блефа их было бы меньше.
Во втором случае, играя с партнёром, который блефует слишком мало, вы чувствуете, что вам придётся скинуться, если он сделает ставку, даже несмотря на то, что остается некоторый шанс его блефа. Остановив его блеф, вы сокращаете шансы оппонента на выигрыш, поскольку он будет ставить только при готовой комбинации, и тогда вы можете спокойно сбрасываться.
Пас-подъём в конце партии лучше всего срабатывает против категории от средних до хороших игроков. Следует меньше применять его против слабых и упертых игроков.
Слабые игроки имеют тенденцию слишком часто уравниваться, когда вы ставите, в конце партии, поэтому вам надо быть весьма уверенным в том, что они сделают ставку, чтобы пас-подъём был выгоден. Например, если вы уверены, что оппонент уравняется, когда вы поставите, вы должны более, чем на 50% быть уверены в том, что он поставит, если вы спасуете; только после этого можно рассматривать вариант пас-подъёма. И даже 50% не
достаточно хорошо, пока вы не убедитесь также, что оппонент уравняется, если вы поднимете ставку (что, естественно, наиболее расположен сделать слабый игрок).
I. Игра на последней позиции
А. Если у вас второе слово, когда все карты сданы, и оппонент делает ставку:
1. Уравнивайтесь, если на вашей руке не стоит поднимать ставку, но на ней больше шансов выигрыша, чем шансы банка, которые вы получаете. Шансы вашего выигрыша представляют собой сумму шансов того, что оппонент блефует, плюс
шансы того, что ваша карта может побить его значащую комбинацию.
2. Поднимайте ставку, если оппонент по-прежнему останется в худшем положении после того, как уравняет ваш подъём. Поднимайтесь также на блефе, если
полагаете, что этот номер пройдёт достаточно часто, чтобы иметь положительное матожидание. Рассмот��ите также вариант подъёма на руке, которая кажется
достойной уравнивания, если оппонент способен сбросить комбинацию лучше вашей; это может принести ещё одну взятку.
В. Если у вас второе слово, когда все карты сданы, и оппонент пасует:
Блефуйте, если полагаете, что это пройдёт достаточно часто, помня, что блеф имеет тенденцию срабатывать не так часто во второй позиции, как в первой.
2. Ставьте до кучи, если вы фаворит с лучшей рукой, даже если противник уравняет вашу ставку. Не ставьте, когда силы ваших рук близки к паритету, дабы избежать пас-
подъёма.
II. Игра в первой позиции
А. Если у вас первое слово, когда все карты сданы, и очень сильная рука:
1. Попробуйте пас-подъём, если оппонент делает ставку и уравнивает ваш подъём немножко чаще, чем он уравнивает вашу ставку, когда вы делаете ее.
2. Выходите ставкой, если вы полагаете, что пас-подъём работает недостаточно часто, чтобы быть выгодным, или же когда вы считаете, что есть шанс выиграть три взятки
в случае, если оппонент поднимет ставку, а вы вторично поднимите ее.
В. Если у вас первое слово и плохая рука:
Блефуйте, если вы можете прорваться на нем достаточно часто, чтобы иметь положительное матожидание.
В противном случае пасуйте и сдавайтесь, если противник делает ставку.
С. Если у вас первое слово и рука, которая должна выиграть в случае уравнивания, но недостаточно сильна, чтобы пробовать на ней пас-подъём:
Делайте ставку, если оппонент уравнивается чаще, чем ставит, когда вы пасуете.
Пасуйте и уравнивайтесь, если оппонент ставит чаще, чем уравнивается.
Никогда не пасуйте с последующим сбросом.
D. Если у вас первое слово на руке чуть хуже, чем у противника, и ставку вашу уравняли:
1. Делайте ставку, если оппонент уравнивается чаще, чем ставит, -- при условии, что некоторые из комбинаций, на которых он делает ставку, когда вы пасуете, хуже
ваших. Пасуйте и уравнивайтесь, если полагаете, что оппонент пасует после вас достаточно часто на комбинациях лучше вашей, но иногда может и блефануть с картой хуже вашей.
2. Пасуйте и уравнивайтесь, когда оппонент ставит чаще, чем уравнивается, при условии, что с вашими шансами банка стоит уравниваться, если он действительно
сделает ставку.
3. Пасуйте и сбрасывайтесь, если противник практически никогда не делает ставки на руке хуже вашей. Психология покера – это естественное развитие чтения рук и использования обмана при розыгрыше ваших комбинаций, таким образом, это прикладное применение
Фундаментальной Теоремы Покера.
Покер – это скорее игра для быстро думающего контингента. Некоторые гении
принадлежат к типу трудяг, не способных к быстрым решениям, они никогда не смогут
стать классными игроками в покер. С другой стороны, некоторые из лучших покеристов мира не имеют суперголовы, но они супербыстро соображают и способны запомнить любую ошибку, допущенную лично или противником. Если в вас таится желание дойти до
титула чемпиона в покере, вы должны сочетать в себе мгновенный полет мысли с прекрасной, быстродействующей памятью прошедших вариантов в различных играх с разными партнёрами.

[Tony · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is a reason every other poker book eventually says, read The Theory of Poker. If you are just learning the game and are going to read one book on poker, this isn't the one. It's too complicated for beginners, who would only benefit by reading the book over and over again. They would be better served picking up one of the For Dummies books or The Illustrated Book of Texas Hold'em.

That said, if you ever want to progress past the beginner stage, you must read this book. He has all of required chapters on pot odds, slowplaying, giving free cards, etc., but his work on optimal bluff strategies based on game theory is what separates this book from everything else on the shelves. Even if you just read his notes the power of semi-bluffing, you are guaranteed to become a better player.

Like most classic books, this is reference book that needs to be read periodically if you are serious about becoming a better poker player, because as one reviewer put it, all of your competition has read it and will use that knowledge against you.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mostly read last year. RJ Bell recommended this as a book that fundamentally changed the way he viewed betting. I found it to be an interesting read regarding how to play the game as well as how to view betting but it was mostly too technical to be anything but a novelty for me.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was the first poker book recommended to me by an avid nonprofessional poker player who happens to be a mathematician. David Sklansky is known on the poker circuit as "the Mathematician" and this book is considered one of the fundamental texts for serious students of the game, still recommended to new players despite its age.

Probably its most important contribution to poker theory is Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker:

Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.

This book takes a very mathematical approach to poker, though it does not dive deeply into probability theory or even more esoteric topics I have seen some poker math books cover. But Sklansky gives very thorough coverage to some of the basic principles that every winning poker player must know: pot odds, implied odds, expected value, and how to calculate the probability of making a given hand, how to calculate the correct amount to put into a pot (or when to fold) based on your estimate of the probabilities of an opponent holding a range of various hands (as well as the odds that he is bluffing), etc. None of the math itself goes beyond very basic algebra, but there is a lot to calculate on the fly, which as Sklansky points out, even geniuses can't automatically do in the speed it takes to play a poker hand, especially as poker is a game of imperfect information.

While the Theory of Poker expects you to become familiar with the necessary mathematical calculations to be a competent player (and makes it pretty clear that no competent player isn't adept at them), Sklansky's advice is always aimed at trying to take advantage of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker. It doesn't matter whether you win any given hand, or whether you get busted out of a game by a bad beat - it matters that you play correctly, which means a positive expectation over the long term.

This is, of course, a masterwork, so why only 4 stars? Well, it's a very theory-heavy book, and while I found the theory important and useful, I'd rate this as a book that every poker player should read and know, but it's a little short on practical tips for actually sitting at the table, beyond "Know your math and know your theory." Of course Sklansky gives many, many examples to illustrate everything he teaches, but I think once you've read this book, you still need to read other books (such as perhaps Ed Harrington's) to actually learn poker strategy and tactics.

This isn't to say Sklansky doesn't talk about game play at all. Naturally he discusses the various types of players - tight, loose, aggressive, passive - and how to respond to someone who bluffs too much, bluffs too little, plays tightly, plays loosely, and so on. So this is a very valuable book. But it is, as I said, very focused on game theory, and thus rather dry. But it's definitely a classic everyone should read.

Also of note is that this book covers general poker theory, as applied to any poker game, which is another reason I didn't rate it 5 stars. I play almost exclusively Texas Hold'Em, while The Theory of Poker gives examples from 5 -and 7-card stud, draw, Razz, and other variants. Which is fine, because in every case, the theory applies whatever type of game you are playing, but be aware this is not a book specifically about hold'em.

[Barrie Penman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Looks like a book for beginners as it covers many different games Jazz, Stud Omaha not to mention Texas Holdem etc. Sorry, it is better to learn one game well first.
Even if you are past the fundemental stages, the book will only confuse.
He jumps games from page to page making it difficult to find a fit one fit all strategy.
By the time you consider yourself a good player and knowledgeable in several games you will find some parts of the book too basic and require something more specialised like pure cash games, tournament play, Head to Head play etc.
Lots of sound helpful information throughout book and will benifit many playes at many levels. But.....as stated above
Will still however have to rate it 4 stars.

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

You are not a poker player until you understand what Sklansky has to say. The pithy writing representing the concepts in this one book will not be mastered by the vast majority of players, who will waste far too much time trying to digest other books. Get what Sklansky has to say here, and you'll already be among a select few. Don't get it? Find another game.

[Tally · Rating 4 out of 5]

Highly recommend this book to anyone wants to learn how to play poker!!

[Ardon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think the reason I enjoy playing poker is that it is an imperfect game. It is impossible to have all the information you need to make a (conventionally) well informed decision, so you need to use what you can to make the right calls, with the awareness that the outcome could still be far from optimal.

Sklansky is quite a good teacher, anchoring a lot of the lessons in the book around what he calls his fundamental theorem - you gain by playing hands as if you could see all your opponents cards, and lose by playing it differently from the way you would if you could see all their cards. It’s a useful heuristic to keep in mind as he explains various plays and when to use them (as well as how to defend against them). In particular, I thought the mathematics behind a lot of Sklanksy’s plays offered some useful substantiation as well as important quick calculations to keep in mind (particularly when heads up against other players).

It must be said, this is a heavy read - you do need to sit down and concentrate to get the most out of it. In addition, the book uses many other forms of poker beyond Texas Hold-Em as examples to illustrate certain concepts - this can often get very confusing unless you know the rules for these. Thankfully, there’s a very helpful appendix which explains the basic rules behind these variants.

Would definitely recommend this to any poker aficionados out there!

[Daniel Kather · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book is okay, I was expecting maybe more explanations from a mathematical and statistical point of view, also going in depth in topics such as game theory, whereas the book really is a poker "how to" book, really explaining lots of singularities in order to explain general tactics, I found it sometimes a little difficult to follow because of this method that really narrates one example after the other.

[Aris Catsambas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very good introduction to the theory of poker, with lessons that can be applied to negotiating in general.

[Micheál McLaughlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very solid!

It covers all kinds of poker games not just Texas Hold 'em. It goes into psychology, calculating pot odds, and mathematical expectations and has a good commentary on how to play based on the players at the table. When to bluff more, when to be tight, when to slow play, when to check-raise, etc.

I'll likely re-read it in a few months, as I probably only absorbed 60% of the value from this.

Cheers

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Heavy in detail and a mathy. It likely won’t make you drastically better at poker all at once. Rather, it will be a reference as you continue to tune your game.

[Jordan McElwee · Rating 4 out of 5]

To start with, this is less of a non-fiction book, and more of a textbook. If you know the fundamentals of poker and want to improve your game, this is for you. This is definitely not a book for beginners! If you need to learn the basics of the game, it's best to look elsewhere.

This book covers a lot of topics necessary to become a better poker player. It starts off relatively simple, explaining the thought behind playing in different ante structures, along with how to calculate your pot odds (and effective and implied odds). This rapidly becomes more complicated and covers far more complex analysis that should be performed at the table. There is also the inclusion of the psychology of poker, which is key to improving your game.

For me, I think the main strength of the book comes from its mathematics. The mathematics presented in the book are all fundamentally sound, and there are plenty of examples of real hands in which the maths is shown. Because of how rigorous it is, the maths sections can get very difficult to read and the going can be slow: even for someone mathematically minded. However, this is just the nature of the book as a technical 'tome' for poker.

Another strength lies in that, as previously mentioned, there are lots of examples showing the techniques that have been learned. This really helps with the digestion of the ideas, and they come from many different types of poker. If you're only really familiar with one type of poker (probably Hold 'Em), then this can get a little confusing, but still helps.

Personally I found the chapter on bluff percentage and game theory the most helpful and interesting. The maths involved is slightly counter-intuitive, and as I've always struggled with how often I should bluff, this is a chapter that resonated and I'll be trying to take forward in my play.

This is certainly a book you should read if you want to improve your poker game. It can be a little dry, but that's to be expected if you're trying to learn to be a better player. It covers most of the key factors of being a decent poker player, with plenty of examples of how to implement in your play. This is absolutely key to becoming a good poker player.

[Tim O'Hearn · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is exactly what everyone says it is. Approachable and cited enough to the point of historical significance. I grew tired of seeing it referenced in books where skilled poker players became quantitative masterminds, so I picked it up. I felt like I was missing out.

The author doesn't at any time make things complicated. That is, aside from his choice of rotating through every poker variant under the sun when giving examples. The math isn't hard, the examples are clear, and the counterintuitive aspects of the game are given just the right amount of attention.

I found it difficult to internalize and apply the finer concepts even as I read the book at a slow pace. Since I wasn't sitting at a poker table as I read through, I accept that I should have taken better notes and will probably have to pick up the book should I ever decide I am serious about improving my playing.

[Daniel Van Rich · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente libro! Es un clásico y explica fundamentos vitales del Poker en general, no solo del Texas Holdem, hubiese querido yo que fuera mas centrado en el Hold'em pero aun así sus conceptos se aplican en toda clase de Poker, definitivamente este libro no es para PRINCIPIANTES es para jugadores que ya manejan los aspectos basicos del juego, el lenguaje del libro y las explicaciones pueden ser dificiles de comprender en una sola leída, aun así al información del libro es de ALTISIMA CALIDAD. Un libro que todo jugador de Poker Debería leer, ahora voy a leer Texas Hold'em for Advanced Players y No limit holde'em: Theory and practice del mismo autor.

[Forest Tong · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of the salient facts about this book is that Sklansky discusses poker strategy in the context of many variations, such as razz, stud, and draw poker. One the one hand, this approach allows the reader to see how there are many general principles of poker that hold regardless of the particular rules. On the other hand, I think it made the book significantly less accessible for a beginner, and rapidly switching between discussions of different games was frequently confusing.

In general, although I learned many things from this book, I was not satisfied with his exposition or his examples.

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely a foundation among poker books, although I wish it had more hold'em specific advice. Some of the situational examples seems to assume you will see % to win under each other player around the table; very theoretical but still plenty of good stuff in here.

2nd time around because I need advice and want to get back to basics. I've lost my last two tornys with pocket 10's. I've come to the conclusion that I don't know how to play pocket 10's.

[Kenny Tang · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you don't love poker, boring as hell... If you love poker, it's still boring as hell but you need to read this. Reads like textbook and lays out decision trees and mathematical theorems. Can't really imagine a serious player not knowing this info expecting to win. Bear thru it, survive it, drink a lot of coffee, but read it if you play.

[Gabriel Osborne · Rating 5 out of 5]

The most perfect book written on poker theory. This truly illustrates the fundamentals of poker.

Written over 20 years ago, every book on poker since could have been extrapolated from the concepts in this book.

[Christoph Weber · Rating 5 out of 5]

http://www.weberseite.at/sport/david-...

[Azary Tamarov · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best poker books

[Steven Ramirez · Rating 5 out of 5]

I should have read this book before trying to win money at Poker. The guy looks like a dork but knows his stuff. 5/7 would bet

[Shaun · Rating 3 out of 5]

I apparently get very bored very quickly reading about math.

[Will Bradford · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty dry but some good ideas. Too many random poker games represented, and the pot sizing and betting is archaic compared to modern hold ‘em games

Every time your opponent plays as they would if they knew your hand, you lose. Every time you play as you would if you knew your opponents hand, you gain

Calling is almost always the weakest option when considering calling, raising, or folding

Position is vital. Acting last means you can also give yourself a free card.

Almost always bet with fair hands. Slow playing should be reserved for monsters, while check raising can be employed with vulnerable hands strong on the flop. Check raise bluffing can be effective against extremely high level players

Multi level thinking: what does my opponent think I think that they have? Etc

Marginal hands should bet on the river as more likely to get called by weaker than checking to opponent for them to bet with only their best hands

Artificial information to opponents like reaching for chips or betting out of turn

Semi bluffing is very high EV and the implied odds of getting paid off on later streets are vital, especially in beating a tight game

Check raise according to position. You want to get your opponents to call a single bet, twice, so consider who else is likely to bet and where they sit

Pot odds - give your opponent bad odds to continue according to their outs

Bluff around 1/7 times. Getting called isn’t always awful as it serves as an advertisement that you play loose, especially early in a session.

Pick your table, identify your ideal hour win rate, and attempt to crush it.

Game theory - randomize your actions, especially against sharp players. Balanced tight aggressive

Wish bet sizing was discussed more in depth

[Victor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente base teórica para o jogo. Entrega uma quantidade enorme de informação de maneira didática sem abrir mão da concisão. Apresenta todos os conceitos fundamentais do jogo e, embora a abordagem mesclada de diversos jogos distintos de poker diminua a riqueza de exemplos práticos para os jogadores de Texas Hold’em, é capaz de, por meio dessa exata abordagem, tornar claras a universalidade e a riqueza desses conceitos demonstrados.

O autor apresenta com sabedoria uma filosofia de jogo muito completa e adaptável que, em vez de sucumbir a um estilo one-size-fits-all, exalta acima de tudo a necessidade do domínio de um leque exaustivo de opções fundamentais, que devem então ser adaptadas à estrutura de jogo e jogadores encontrada em cada mesa. Um guia para jogadores intermediários, mas que, atrelado ao exercício do jogo em si como complemento prático para maior teste e assimilação dos princípios estabelecidos, pode ser de imenso valor para o estudante iniciante diligente.

[Viktor Krajczar · Rating 3 out of 5]

It has some potential and explains some of the basics of poker, but for that Dan Harrington's books are much more sophisticated reads (of course 'Harrington on hold'em' books are specific to hold'em. This book intends to apply to all types of poker). This book tries to explain too many things in too few pages and therefore fails in most cases. Sometimes the explanations contradict each other, or maybe I just missed the part of the explanation that tells you why the mentioned situations are different. I also didn't like the examples, they seemed too specific. Overall, I didn't enjoy reading this book.

My overall feeling might be affected by the fact that I read the Hungarian translation of the book, which was terrible. But I've ignored that fact in giving it 3 stars, otherwise I would have given it only 2.

[Darren Key · Rating 3 out of 5]

Book is around 30 years old. Fundamentals are fundamentals, and this book changed the way I view playing poker games by thinking in terms of effective odds / pot odds, but much of this book uses examples from seven card stud / five card draw / razz poker which, as far as I know, is rarely played now; this made understanding some of the concepts harder as I'm unfamiliar with the games and thus the situations involved. The book contains introductions to game theory and the usage of game theory in poker situations, but the game theory involved is pretty rudimentary. I think the principles outlined are a good baseline for most poker-like games, but for no-limit hold 'em, the techniques are outdated. I also found some of the writing hard to understand at times, and some of the examples throughout seemed a little contrived.

[Chase · Rating 4 out of 5]

The good: This book has extremely simple and straightforward explanations, is not flashy the way many poker books can be, and the chapters are mercifully short compared to some other books I've read that feel the need to belabor the point.

The not-so-good: Man this book is out-of-date. There is a ton of advice here for draw poker and 7-card stud. I know Sklansky has another book focused on hold em and this is supposed to be more general, but a ton of the examples are pretty specific spots that could only happen in these other formats. Not as relevant for most players today.