Small Stakes Hold'em by Ed Miller, Sklansky, and Malmuth

[mchilger]

I will post more reviews over the coming weeks.

You can buy Small Stakes Hold'em in our store.

[darvon]

For ITHers, we have discussed SSH a lot. Most concede that in a two book library, it's ITH and SSH.

What I love about SSH is the focus on post-flop play. I am a beginner with about 13000 hands and I learned a lot in my first pass on SSH.

If you have at least 2 books on your shelf, this should be one of them.

[Stark]

This is an excellent book, but read Matthew's first. Matthew's book is solid and can get you started and then make you into a really good player. Not just building a strong foundation, but show sure-fire ways to be successful. SSH, on the other hand, features a lot of aggression which definitely pays off through playing marginal hands in multi-way pots. The key is, in my opinion, that it has to be used selectively and you have to be able to fold hands even if you catch part of the flop. The aggressive play can lead to a lot of second best hands if you use some of the plays too often and find yourself calling those hands down on a regular basis or betting out as someone behind you calls down with a better hand. Also, your swings are going to be a bit more pronounced through aggressive play.

I am not saying Matthew does not advocate aggressive play, he does and that is a must in limit hold 'em, but Miller's book, if in the hands of someone who does not have a decent enough grasp of the game, can be very dangerous.

I love both books and re-read each constantly. Again, just my opinion, if any of you (Ed or Matthew included) think I am talking out of my butt, please correct me.

[rocketplayer]

I agree that ITH is the best book to start with. I my opinion Matthew's starting hands chart is the best of its kind.

SSH and other Sklansky books help push you to a new level against many players.

[jfletcher]

I have read both ITH and SSH a couple times, and I found ITH to be better for the tighter internet games (3-4 people seeing the flop) and SSH to be better for the loose live games (5-6 or more people seeing the flop). Sometimes you can find those games on the web at .50-1 or below, but I haven't found any higher than that.

I actually lost a bunch of money trying to implement SSH at a 1-2 online game that was really much tighter than the ones for which SSH was intended. Once I stepped back and leaned more on ITH, I started winning again at that level.

[Pizza]

This book is the best book I have ever read on poker. ITH and SSH are both great books but this book is geared specifically to small stakes play with loose and unsophisticated players. It's not an easy read and requires lots of thinking but the rewards are well worth it. If you play in loose games, you must memorize this book and you will do very well.

[darvon]

The thing I liked best about SSH was the focus on post-flop play.

It came at a time when I wanted to upgrade that part of my game. SSH puts a lot of effort into post-flop.

[ThePaladin]

I like this book a lot. A lot of great advice for low limit games. The only thing I don't like about the concepts is that you need to assume how many people will enter the pot and that makes for to much judgement for the early positions.

[jeffnc]

This is a very good BUT (and I have a big but)....

As more time goes on I feel even more strongly about my first-impression reservation about the book. I think the theory is sound, and it's explained well. The problem is that you must be very careful in applying it because it all depends very strongly on the existence of specific game conditions. It's all too easy to see some of those game conditions, and simply tell yourself it's correct to play in your game in the "SSH style". However it's rarely very clear that your game really fits these specific conditions. Often, the game conditions are somewhat loose, and there are a couple bad players, but that does not necessarily meet the conditions. You can't switch gears and play crazy just because your game is a little loose.

A second criticism of the book is the cavalier attitude taken by the author. In his attempt to pound you over the head to get certain points across, he overstates his case. For example, he states that none of the decisions in the book are really borderline or close, to drive home the point he's trying to make. However he's since admitted that this is not really the case, some decisions are actually very close, and he just did that to get through to some folks who needed real convincing. I think this is a disservice to many readers.

Those caveats having been said, very good book.

[k0ssi]

Just got the book from one of my friends and cant decide, if I should read it or not...

I play small stakes NL with my friends at poker nights (4-5 per.)

Would the book (SSH) give me anything to my gameplay or should i just skip it ?

[royster]

If you've read ITH, it's alot of the same ideas, but with different words. For me it gave better insight on backdoor draws and how they fit into your strategy.

I think that things often sink in better with a different voice so I recommend it.

[ryanflies]

Just to clarify, SSH is definately not a book for anyone new to poker. Sklansky comes out and says something like "the tactics/strategies presented in this book are every bit as complex as those used in higher limit games, they're just different and sometimes contradictory." he says 2+2's reason for writing it is that the low-limit games are presently easier then ever due to poker's recent popularity, and not as some sort of book taylored to beginners.

[yeltzen]

The book is very good... it's hard for me to say that because of the way this book is glorified on the 2+2 forums by the authors and their fanbois and the way they attempt to destroy the careers of other writers (i.e. the Lee Jones crap that took place). The postflop stuff is awesome, regardless of whether or not you want to play this ultra-aggressive, pot-equity-chasing style of play. Everyone should read this part of the book. The river section is also very good, especially the parts about wanting or not wanting overcalls. I have used this stuff pretty often in my games.

However, I think the author's are so in love with their own creation that very little common sense is taken into account. Reading hands is virtually ignored... I know that it's not very important at small stakes games, but sometimes they present the material and basically say, "your opponents are complete idiots". There are times when this is the case, but I don't think there's anything wrong with having a good read on your opponent and making a fold even though SSH says that your pot equity is too high to fold. Maybe I'm the idiot, but I simply think that the book is very good, but it's not the "Bible" of Small Stakes games that the authors think it is.

[Penguin]

I think I like SSH so much because it allowed me to rationalise the increased aggression I needed when I switched to 6max.

Personally, I like the very aggressive style it recommends. Sure, it's not the Bible of Small Stakes Holdem. But no book is.

I think "your pot equity is too high to fold" is a someowhat dangerous concept. But I'd much rather lose one big bet nine times than a ten big bet pot once by folding incorrectly. Most players who think they are good pride themselves too much on their laydowns. Like Caro (I think) says "if you're averaging a big profit on your calls, you're not calling enough".

[groucho]

Why do the authors continually insist that most low limit games have 6-8 players seeing the flop? I haven't seen any sites (the books seems geared to online LL multitabling players) at any limits where that's the norm.

More accurate numbers seem to be:

Limits % Seein Flop
.5/1 35-55
1/2 30-45
2/4 28-40
3/6 25-35

And often these tables will only have 8 or 9 players. So 50%, for example, means 4 players much of the time.