Customer Reviews

Mastering No-Limit Hold'em

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The first two chapters reveal that the book is superficial, repetitive and confused.

The book says it is aimed at fixed and variable cash buy-in games between $100 and $500. On page 8, we are told "in all cases, we recommend you buy-in for the maximum possible amount. There is no reason to put yourself at a disadvantage . . ."

Just 3 pages later, on page 11, we are told "we strongly advise you buy-in for the maximum amount. First, many of your opponents will buy in for the maximum. Second, if you purchase the minimum, you will be relatively short stacked. Why put yourself at a disadvantage?"

Now, not only is this advice repetitive, but no valid justification is offered for buying in at the maximum.

The fact is that the bigger your stack, the better player you need to be. There is a reason for this. Any hand you open as a big stack, with a limp or a raise, gives implied odds for all those with position on you to call with a wider variety of hands. This is why Ciaffone/Reuben and later Miller suggest that newer players not play big stacks initially.

In addition, the book is confused. On page 2, we are told that bluffing is not a big weapon anymore in this level of game where people routinely call all their stack on one pair. However, on p. 21, we are told that a big stack is a weapon to be used to bluff with, citing with approval an example where a big stack raised 99 preflop, got bet into on an A83 board, and then reraised all-in, getting a player with AT to fold.

In reality, "big stacks as weapon" is much more of a tourney concept where the blinds increase and you can't go in your pocket. And the advice on page 2 is correct - many calling stations exist today, and attempting to bluff those players is incorrect.

Chapter 3 entitled "Know Your Foes" offers nothing new.

Chapter 4 entitled "Odds & Betting Strategies" is ill-conceived.

Discussion of pot odds includes an example where we are told to fold on the turn with a nut flush draw and 2 overcards in last position for $80 in a $220 pot because the pot odds are "approximately" 2.75:1 and that's not enough to call "even if we attempted to value the overcards."

First, $80 to win $220 is exactly 2.75:1. Second, if both overcards are live, we are 2:1 to win the pot, and are getting an overlay. If one of the overcards is live, we have 12 outs which is 2.8:1, enough to call especially considering implied odds.

Discussion of implied odds includes example of nut flush draw getting 3.5:1 from the pot on the flop. "However, if you make your hand, you believe you will be able to make a large amount of money on the river by traping a loose bettor for most of his stack."

I don't know about you, but unless it's flush over flush, I don't trap people for most of their stack when a flush hits. It's simply not hidden. A straight draw should have been used as the example.

One crucial omission: there is no discussion of odds with 2 cards to come, as in all in on the flop!!

Moreover, there is no discussion of how you go about finding yourself in an implied odds situation. The key is entering pots in position when a big stack (or two) has already entered the pot. In many ways,the authors virtually ignore stack size in their discussion of strategy. Stack size is paramount in NLHE

The discussion of betting strategies is little more than giving you a range to bet under certain situations. This material is nothing new.

Moreover, no consideration is given to how to bet draws. For example, with a flush draw and two overcards, you can bet the pot on the flop. Often, you will win the pot without a fight, and if you get called, you just got 2:1 on your bet with a 2:1 shot to hit your card on the turn.

"Relative position" is described by the authors as your position on the flop. In other words, if you were in the cut off seat, and the button folds, you have last "relative" position.

I guess that's OK, but it's not very helpful.

I didn't see where they discuss what most consider to be "relative position," ie your position with respect to the preflop raiser. Who cares if you have the button on the flop if you are first to act after the preflop raiser makes a continuation bet? This is why cold calling raises is usually so wrong.

Relative position means where you are relative to the preflop raiser. The best position, of course, is directly to the right of the preflop raiser, so if makes a continuation bet, he's betting the field into you.

I could go on, but bottom line, Ciaffone & Reuben's PL & NL Poker book is vastly superior.

If you are looking to play no-limit cash games (as opposed to tournaments) and your main experience with NL Texas holdem is watching poker on TV or playing sit-and-go or multi-table tournaments online, please get this book. The truth is that NL holdem against ordinary players is not a game that requires or demands a lot of fancy plays and bluffs, but rather mostly solid fundamentals. It might be "sexy" to play like Gus Hanson or Daniel Negreanu do on TV (at short-handed final tournament tables) but you don't want to play like this in the typical game. This book stresses these fundamentals of how to bet, when to raise/call/fold, how to play after the flop, etc.

I thought that I was a decent NL player, but I underestimated the differences between cash game and tournament style holdem. In the few weeks I've had the Fox/Harker book, my results playing NL holdem cash games, both online and in a casino, have been great.

This book assumes that you will be playing in a "restricted" buy-in NL holdem game against average opposition, which is the type of game you would play online (with a $25-$200 buy-in) or in a casino (where the buy-in is usually in the $100-$500 range). Unlike Doyle Brunson's SuperSystem, Harker and Fox do not assume you are playing with a huge stack of thousands of dollars against players that are scared to death of your raises. They also do not assume that you are a world-class player in terms or putting your opponents on a hand.

I gave the book 4 stars instead of 5 because I would have personally preferred a lengthier discussion of "implied" and "reverse implied" odds and more mathematics (although most will probably find plenty of math for their taste).

I play poker for a living and online no-limit cash games between 2/4 and 5/10 are currently my games of choice. I have read probably 15 poker books and this one (MNLHE) is far and away the worst. I think the only reason it ever got decent ratings is that for a long time there were very few books on no-limit on the market. This has changed. No Limit Holdem: Theory And Practice (NLHE:TAP) by Sklansky and Miller is now the Bible on cash no-limit, and Phil Gordon's Little Green Book and Little Blue Book are also very good.

As other reviewers have noted, this book endorses the bizarre idea that a short stack is an inherent disadvantage (as opposed to simply a less profitable choice than a deep stack) in a cash game. This commonly believed idea was debunked once and for all in NLHE:TAP.

MNLHE's problems get much worse than that, though. You only have to reach page 18 before this stunning advice appears. You're sitting in a $2/$3 NL game with $60, having just lost a pot, and:

"You look down at 9d7h in the cut-off position. An early position player raises to $7 and 4 players call. Normally you would fold this hand but in this situation you might elect to call. It is likely your cards are live. If you hit the flop you can win a large pot."

If you haven't played much no-limit you'll have to take my word for it that this is unbelievably bad advice. I feel silly even explaining why, but: with a deep stack of say $300, a call could be justified, but with a stack as small as 20 big blinds, your payoff when you hit the flop in a big way is far too small. You have good position, but that is worth a lot less when you're short stacked. The pot is going to be something like $40 on the flop and you only have $53, so your choices are going to be limited to allin or fold. It's also worth noting that in a loose game there's absolutely no reason to believe that "your cards are probably live".

Wander over to page 21 and we see the authors endorse the idea that having a stack of $400 facing two players with stacks of $70 and $125 is any different than having a stack of $125 in the same situation. See NLHE:TAP if you don't understand why this is wrong.

Turning to the quiz on page 161, the authors ask:

"You hold QQ in the cutoff seat. There are two limpers to you, you raise to $20, and only one of the limpers calls you. The flop doesn't appear threatening: 7h7c3s. However, to your surprise, the preflop limper bets $30 (he has you outchipped). It's your turn to act; what is your action?" (You began the hand with $150 in a $2/$3 game)

This is an utterly trivial hand, but the authors start their answer:

"What does your opponent hold? Is he bluffing? Hands like this are why some of us get grey hair!"

Um, really? You guys must be easily stressed.

"If your opponent is tight and solid, a fold is probably correct; he likely has one of the hands that beats you."

Are you serious? What is a "tight and solid" player doing splashing around preflop for over 1/8th of the effective stacks, out of position, with 33 or a hand that includes a 7? And if he does have one of those hands (or is slowplaying aces or kings) why is he betting straight out at me instead of checking and giving me a chance to put more money in the pot if I have something like AQ? Folding here is just ridiculous. The pot is $48 and your stack is $130 - there's no way you're doing anything on a flop like this except getting the money in. You should either raise or call here depending on the tendencies of the opponent, but in either case your focus is squarely on getting all the money in the middle.

Those are some of the more egregious examples; I could go on, but my point should be made.

The writing is terrible, both in terms of correct use of English and in terms of clarity and readability. There are grade-school grammatical mistakes like "not that great of a situation" (rather than "not that great a situation"). The narrative is tangled and often wanders off on little tangents of questionable relevance. It is frequently anecdotal rather than dealing with underlying theoretical context. This adds up to a very confused presentation of ideas which the authors (given some of the jaw-dropping advice) probably don't have much of a grasp on in the first place.

I felt compelled to write this lengthy review after ordering MNLHE from Amazon on the strength of the reviews. I learnt nothing from this book and its presence on my bookshelf is nothing but an irritation. I'm not one of those people who trawl Amazon looking for things they can give one star to, but I really do think that is what the book deserves. Buy NLHE:TAP instead, or if you already have that, save your money and reread it.

Having played for several years (prior to the days of 21 year old millionaires and Gus Hanson)... I have great respect for the subject matter in the book.

Nothing flashy or dramatic... just good solid poker strategy.

I was first attracted to the book because I have played with Russell Fox several times at the Bicycle Casino in CA... and he is the most unexcitable player I have ever met. Yet somehow, he continues to cash-out absurd amounts of chips time and time again.

I have even caught myself on the loosing end of a bluff/move in a heads up match against Mr. Fox.

Live and learn... read this book and be successful. The tips are legitimate, and very relevant to the world of minimum/maximum buy-in structures.

Areas covered include not only tips for play, but tips on maintaining a winning attitude and a solid financial base for your endeavors into Poker.

I would tell you this is a great book for getting started in no limit ring games but if I did that I might find you sitting across from me making my job at the tables harder.
Seriously this is a great book for getting started in smaller stakes ($100 to $500) no limit tables and also for the internet play. This book assumes you know how to play good poker so if you are looking for starting hand requirements etc. you should probably start with a more rudimentary book on poker, but for no limit betting structure, pot odds and just general strategy this is a must have.
This book is not geared for tournament play but for ring games, get another book for tournaments.

If you're considering playing the restricted buy-in no limit hold 'em games that have become popular in most casinos, then this book is a must. It is a complete guide to developing a winning strategy. If you are already a winning player, this book will help reinforce many of the concepts that you already are using, and should increase your win rate. I've been beating the small no limit games for two years now, and I find that this book has helped shore up some of the leaks in my game.

This book really fits into a void within the poker literature because there are a million books about limit and no limit tournaments but a scare few address no limit cash games. The irony is that NL ring games are the types in which most of us play. What Fox and Harker do in these pages is discuss various elements and strategies necessary for play in the 10, 25, 50, 100, and 200 dollar NL games. However, it obviously won't help you deal with Juanda and Matusow at NL 10,000 because the authors' views are fairly conservative. The tactics showcased here are not ones that are going to appeal to loose-aggressive players. Theirs is a tighter game which becomes classically aggressive in moments of strength. Appendix A contains a play-by-play analysis of an 8 hour NL session at the Bicycle Casino in Los Angeles. By offering this, readers get an opportunity to "sweat out" a game with the authors which is an absolutely wonderful idea. It really allows you an opportunity to plug up some of the leaks in your own game by seeing the right and wrong way to do things. Personally, I'd give anything for Dan Harrington to provide us with a 400 pages sweat-now that would be worth about $500. Anyway, the real live play example was helpful and I'd like to see more authors make use of this technique. Overall, this shouldn't be the first book you buy on No Limit, especially since Ed Miller will be coming out with one in a month or so, but Fox and Harker have given us something valuable, so, if you're having any trouble in the small to mid-range NL games, this one's a must read.

This book does exactly what it sets out to do. It gives no-limit novices- not poker novices, The book assumes that the readers are familiar with poker- a good introduction into no limit holdem. The emphasis is on smaller, fixed buy in, games.

The book doesn't go very deeply into every subject, but it touches on all the important ones, and definitely those that new no limit players need to consider.

My only criticism is that the writing isn't the most user friendly, but (being honest) I've only read the book once so far, and the subject is not simple. It's worth getting.

This is a fairly straightforward book for no limit; however it is a niche book. This book discusses the small buy-in no limit cash games found mostly in the LA clubs and Las Vegas casinos. While I think it provides an adequate overview for these specific games it is short on the underelying theory of no limit holdem and almost completely void of the psychology which is the main thrust of no limit holdem. The book is for the casual to intermediate player who wants to play at these smaller games. My main complaints are that there is much basic material that is more common sense than anything and the authors never take you to a place of elevating your game. If you are still learning the basics and don't understand things like position and how to read holdem flops it may be okay but personally I didn't feel I got much value out of it. Do an honest assessment of your own game-if you would consider yourself a beginner or struggling intermediate player you will learn enough to make the read worthwhile otherwise it is very middle of the road and you might find better value in "Super System" or "Harrington on Holdem". While "Harrington on Holdem" is written to be a tournament no limit book most players will find tremendous value learning from a truly great player like Harrington and you will learn underlying theory of no limit holdem that can be applied to cash or tournament games.

Well I think this is a quite good book, but especially for beginners. People can understand the differences between limit and no-limit hold'em, but that's all. You won't master your no-limit skill with this book. Of course there are chapters that are good, for example the Odds and Betting Strategies and the Position. If you are new you should read it, but be ready to buy other better books that can give you the essence of no-limit hold'em. For example the magnificient Little Green Book by Phil Gordon or if you want to play absolutely an expert level and want to take part in tournaments the Harrington's books are waiting for you. All in all this is a good book for beginners, before more serious ones.
Buy it but be ready to buy another ones!