Why aren't the book authors in the finals?

I'm on the verge of making the commitment of studying, not just reading, the supposed best, highest rated books on HoldEm Poker, starting with Sklansky/Malmuth's "Texas Hold Em for Advanced Players" (since it is so often mentioned as the 'bible' of books, and because the authors claim other books are incorrect), then use their strategies as a reference point and comparison standard for any other books I might read. Not far into this book, I've soon come to realize there are an almost limitless number of combinations of situational facts one can be in, and remembering what to do, even with their qualifying remarks such as 'IT IS USUALLY CORRECT' and 'NORMALLY,' to be a daunting task. Here are my questions before I give these guys too much credit and invest the months/years it will take to learn their stuff. If the authors are so good, why aren't I seeing them at the finals tables on TV? I've mainly watched NBC, as recently as yesterday, where one of the Heads Up finalists has only been playing a few years, (I think they said since 2003.) How many braclets do Sklansky and Malmuth have? Have they taken 'cash game only' vows? Do they not want to be seen on TV? Are their strategies not that good, and if not, then why aren't the pros who win the tournaments writing the books? What's the deal? Also, is there any evidence that top pros and these quick studies like Chris Moneymaker have ever sat down, studied these books, analyzed and memorized 'what if' scenarios until they're blue in the face? I refuse to believe that players like Jennifer Tilley and Evelyn Ng have studied Sklansky/Malmuth strategies. My instincts tell me they are simply relying on THEIR instincts.

I'll bet you a $100 that they've all ready Slansky & Malmuth and Harrington as well.

A lot of questions there Brat.

A.
In a nutshell; (1) of course, those who write poker books have had some previous experience and success of playing high stakes poker or the publishers wouldn't bother taking them on. (2) Lots of pros who have won tournaments HAVE already written good books on the subject.

B.
In my limited experience "Yes", memorising "what if..." scenarios would indeed be fruitless because it all depends on the type of competition and those who hold the cards.

C.
Good books are a useful guide but that's exactly what they should be: "useful guides". Studying them religiously and taking their ideas as gospel is just wrong. Take on board their insights but I think you need to develop your own style once you get a feel for the game.

As they say, in most fields; "You can only really break the rules once you become good enough."

So where are they? And where's Harrington?

Well put TurnipHead. Everyone develops their own poker personality. Reading never hurt anyone.

"So where are they? And where's Harrington?"

Harrington still plays. Maybe he's just not on the TV shows you watch. Brunson also still plays of course. A lot of these authors are old geezers who have "been there, done that". The older guys don't get on the TV as much cos TV land loves youth and the younger players coming through, so they get more air time.

So they're playing in other, more prestigious and lucrative tournaments than the lowly events like wsop, Heads Up Championships, etc? Or they've written off tournaments altogether? I've seen Doyle, but when's the last time anyone saw the other guys even enter a big tournament that gets world wide media exposure?

I don't think the tournaments covered by TV have max. age limits for entering.

I've mainly watched NBC's Poker After Dark, which invites many Full Tilt players, but they have other players as well. Then the Sunday afternoon programs like the recent Heads Up tournament are also NBC. I don't have cable TV.

quads said:

Well put TurnipHead. Everyone develops their own poker personality. Reading never hurt anyone.

Click to expand...

I've not even completed Slansky's first chapter on 'pre-flop from early position' and while the other guy's personality may come into play, he hasn't said anything about my personality playing a role in maximizing my income. They care about which cards are dealt and bets made. They don't really care what kind of personality the reader has.

You haven't read enough to make any kind of judgement. And it's like every kind of Art or endeavor... first you learn the fundamentals, you learn what others have learned before you, then you able to improvise and put your own stamp on things. But without the foundation, it will be harder for you to learn the most from your experiences.

The more I read your comments, the more I think you're just looking for an excuse not to study up. To each his own.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. I've studied various subjects all my life, and continue to do so. I just thought someone may know where these guys play, and if they've been quoted anywhere as having gone on record as saying 'I only like hanging out at the casinos and playing cash games' (or something like that), with a track record of winning as much there as anyone. I know just from watching TV that Hellmuth and Doyle play tournaments. (They each have famous Hold Em books.) I know that Ivey plays at 'the big cash games' at the Bellagio. But I was specifically wondering about Slansky, Malmuth, and Harrington. Their books are often touted as the best. Just wanted to see some fruits of their knowledge and skill, that's all. And I plan to study their books whether I get an answer to my question or not. I've only played two games in the amateur poker leagues and nothing else. And I'm smart enough to know that I don't know what I'm doing. I finished high only because the others are so foolish with their chips. I could go each week to win 3rd and 4th place points, but I don't really need a T-shirt or baseball cap, and even if I did get enough points to go national, I wouldn't last long against the competition. You have to study AND gain experience, but I plan to do more of the former for the time being cause I don't like showing up and wasting my time. I would normally like the social aspect, but the games are pretty quiet, so it's not really social. Too bad there aren't more women playing. If we can't talk, at least I can look. I'll go back to the league and practice from time to time as I learn, hoping to be better each time as I apply new knowledge. Until then, it's a waste of wallowing in mediocrity.

The thing is the best poker player in the world, whoever that may be can play the WSOP main event every week for the rest of his/her life and never win it . Poker by its nature has a lot of variance, hence its accessibility to everyone. Studying up the game with all of its little situational and subtle diffenences will make you game stronger. Thats a fact. Ignoring basic strategy is folly, and playing on feel will only get you so far in the game. Dont just read the books, study them, then come back and lets see if your opnion has changed.

tenbob said:

The thing is the best poker player in the world, whoever that may be can play the WSOP main event every week for the rest of his/her life and never win it . Poker by its nature has a lot of variance, hence its accessibility to everyone. Studying up the game with all of its little situational and subtle diffenences will make you game stronger. Thats a fact. Ignoring basic strategy is folly, and playing on feel will only get you so far in the game. Dont just read the books, study them, then come back and lets see if your opnion has changed.

Click to expand...

that is so true it reall is feel goes so far after tht u have to round out ure game with the basics

tenbob said:

The thing is the best poker player in the world, whoever that may be can play the WSOP main event every week for the rest of his/her life and never win it . Poker by its nature has a lot of variance, hence its accessibility to everyone. Studying up the game with all of its little situational and subtle diffenences will make you game stronger. Thats a fact. Ignoring basic strategy is folly, and playing on feel will only get you so far in the game. Dont just read the books, study them, then come back and lets see if your opnion has changed.

Click to expand...

So tell me, are Slansky, Malmuth, and Harrington playing in these events you speak of? Have they retired and moved to Monocco or Macau, living off book royalties? Does anyone have cable? Has anyone seen them? That's all I'm asking. Geez people, let's not make this a complicated theoretical discussion on how or why one should be studying poker. If no one has a clue if the guys are dead or alive, just say so. Post something like "I haven't seen hide nor hair of those guys since Carter was President."

Harrington won the main event in '95, and made the final table in 2003 and 2004. I believe he has another gold bracelet besides his main event win.

Sklansky has 3 WSOP bracelets and just final tabled a WPT event this year (I watched it like three weeks ago).

If you don't want to hear peoples well thought out replies, you could have just used GOOGLE :five:

LMAO. "Where's Harrington?" What rob said and if you're going to make such an idiotic comment, at least do a google search first.

And what has that so called "Doyle Brunson" ever done with his "Super System"? What the hell does Barry Greenstein know about poker? LOoooooooooooooooooooooollllL.

u wanna know where they are check out the biggest cash games in the world they are all regulars there

OP question reminds me of the California Gold Rush.

Few found gold, and it was the folks who supplied all the gold seekers who made the money.

PokerBrat2, in addition to Google, go to cardplayer.com. You can do a search of their player database. It has plenty of results for the players you seek.

Yes, alot of these guys play in cash games, and they only track the tourney results. But some of them have cashed and/or won smaller tournies.

But look at Brunson, Hellmuth, and Chan, each having won 10 WSOP Bracelets in their careers. Hellmuth just won his 10th last year. They all have been playing for over 20 years (Doyle and Chan even longer) and yet they only have 10 WSOP wins. They aren't schlubs. It just shows that one poker's biggest stage, nothing is a guarantee, no matter how good you are. You can get your money in as a 80-20 favorite and lose. You can be all in on the turn and your opponent can hit a miracle 2 outer. Or you can move in with 83s and flop a flush. Crazy things happen on the felt no matter how you play.

read my book, ive won the wsop main event every year since 1942 back when carter was president, jfk was leadin this country and truman was running america into the ground

Many of the very best players stick to cash games simply because there is much more money to be made than with donkaments.

Even if they do break their exile to play in large events like the WSOP or whatever, large tournaments are subject to a huge amount of variance, especially nowadays with the huge fields that most big donkaments get (though feats like Harrington's consecutive final tables shouldn't go unnoted).

Chris Moneymaker and Jamie Gold are living examples that pure luck can win you the big one. Greg Raymer on the other hand has consistently showed in big events and obviously is a real player. I see the authors you speak of pretty regularly on TV in the special events like the PPT and Poker Superstars and the televised cash games.

One thing to remember is these authors wrote their books a while back before the internet poker boom and their "systems" were all designed around the textbook style of play. I think there were less than 80 entries when Doyle Brunson last won the big one and only double that or so when Johnny Chan won in the late 80s. The poker world has changed and these folks probably prefer playing their peers in cash games rather than wading through 8000 internet satellite winners to make a final table...

I'd like to point out something else, too: Being a great poker player is not the same as being a great poker author. Nor does being a great poker author necessarily require you to be a great poker player.

Knowing and doing are two different things. Some of the greatest advice can come from someone who may not be up for the challenge of playing in the biggest games himself. It's a little like taking advice from a sports coach; surely he can know his stuff without being able to perform?

Poker, I've gradually come to realize, is a lot more about doing than knowing. Knowing how to play is only the beginning. Actually playing the way I'm supposed to is a whole other ballpark. Dealing with the psychological pressure, the fatigue and the impulses is what separates the stratosphere experts from the low limit grinders.

Be careful not to dismiss advice based on who it comes from, rather than how good it is. Be equally careful not to trust advice just because it's out of the mouth of a world champion.

F Paulsson said:

I'd like to point out something else, too: Being a great poker player is not the same as being a great poker author. Nor does being a great poker author necessarily require you to be a great poker player.

Knowing and doing are two different things. Some of the greatest advice can come from someone who may not be up for the challenge of playing in the biggest games himself. It's a little like taking advice from a sports coach; surely he can know his stuff without being able to perform?

Poker, I've gradually come to realize, is a lot more about doing than knowing. Knowing how to play is only the beginning. Actually playing the way I'm supposed to is a whole other ballpark. Dealing with the psychological pressure, the fatigue and the impulses is what separates the stratosphere experts from the low limit grinders.

Be careful not to dismiss advice based on who it comes from, rather than how good it is. Be equally careful not to trust advice just because it's out of the mouth of a world champion.

Click to expand...

^^^^^^^This

joosebuck said:

read my book, ive won the wsop main event every year since 1942 back when carter was president, jfk was leadin this country and truman was running america into the ground

Click to expand...

OMG joose takes that drug that causes sleep walking, sleep driving, and sleep typing!

F Paulsson said:

Poker, I've gradually come to realize, is a lot more about doing than knowing. Knowing how to play is only the beginning. Actually playing the way I'm supposed to is a whole other ballpark. Dealing with the psychological pressure, the fatigue and the impulses is what separates the stratosphere experts from the low limit grinders.

Click to expand...

I have had this same revelation. It is not the table, or cards, or other players who beat me anymore. It is me. I probably do give off tells that help others see when I am about to beat myself again, but other than that, which can be fixed, the only nemesis at any poker table is me, myself and I.