Just Got Harrington On Hold Em Iii

[dna4ever 2]

Just got Harrington on Hold Em III from Amazon today.I have only skimmed through it, but so far its awesome. The entire thing is scenarios with what would you do questions at each stage of the action.

[Flushgarden 0]

I plan on getting that very soon.I have a question about Harrington though. Does he every play in any tourneys besides the WSOP? I never hear his name brought up anywhere besides talking about his books and the WSOP.

[dna4ever 2]

I plan on getting that very soon.I have a question about Harrington though. Does he every play in any tourneys besides the WSOP? I never hear his name brought up anywhere besides talking about his books and the WSOP.

Dan Harrington Poker Results

[SSPadawon4 0]

Dan Harrington Poker Results

I was about to start volume 2, but I can find where i put it. But as soon as Im done i getting volume 3.

[grocery_mony 9]

in b and m bookstores yet or just online?

[FourFlusher 0]

Gotta check my mail...I ordered it the first day it was available...I thought they said like October or something was the scheduled ship date?Nope, wasn't there, but, The Tao of Poker was...

[phlegm 6]

Can vol 3 stand on its own or should you get 1 and 2 first??

[grocery_mony 9]

Can vol 3 stand on its own or should you get 1 and 2 first??

havent got 3 yet but your crazy if you play tournaments not to buy 1 and 2

[Suited_Up 2]

Can vol 3 stand on its own or should you get 1 and 2 first??

They're a series, you need to read them in order.

[psujohn 0]

havent got 3 yet but your crazy if you play tournaments not to buy 1 and 2

I haven't read 2 yet - sitting on the shelf - but I found that 1 was largely stuff I knew already. I found the discussion of outs and pot odds in SSHE to be better than the euqivalent sections in HOH 1.

[Suited_Up 2]

I haven't read 2 yet - sitting on the shelf - but I found that 1 was largely stuff I knew already. I found the discussion of outs and pot odds in SSHE to be better than the euqivalent sections in HOH 1.

Read 2.

[ricker 0]

HOH Vol II is like knowing basic algebra and being forced to study advanced calculus.

[vvganeshavv 4]

i'm reading part I right now....i like the what would u do scenerio's at the end..

[Aces, Full, Mike 0]

The Harrington books are good, but their cover blurb is a complete joke."only player to make it to the final table in 2003 (field of 839) and 2004 (field of 2,576) - considered by cognoscenti to be the greatest achievement in WSOP history"What a farce. Chan's 1,1,2 is hands down the greatest achievment in WSOP history. Mason will spare no measure to push his books, even inaccuracies and BS.

[AcesUp46 0]

Wrong...the greatest achievement is Moneymaker knocking out Phil Ivey in 2003 ME by sucking out for a higher full house on the river.2nd greatest achievement is for Alex Kahaner to CALL Kenna James all-in at heads up in a WPT event with J-10o after being told that it's past midnight.

[RDog 0]

Read 2.

Shhhhhhhhh

[aadams_22 3]

The Harrington books are good, but their cover blurb is a complete joke."only player to make it to the final table in 2003 (field of 839) and 2004 (field of 2,576) - considered by cognoscenti to be the greatest achievement in WSOP history"What a farce. Chan's 1,1,2 is hands down the greatest achievment in WSOP history. Mason will spare no measure to push his books, even inaccuracies and BS.

Chan didn't do his run during the poker boom the way Harrington did...that's why it's considered better than Chan's. Chan didn't have to go through thousands of players when he did his.

[Wandigo 1]

So after all this HOH talk I see on this board, I think I might actually pick up a copy and see what all the fuss is about. Should I start with Vol. 1 or is there certain things discussed in each vol. that I could choose from and skip others? I can get a used copy of 1 on Amazon for under $10, so I'm thinking to start with that one?

[Suited_Up 2]

So after all this HOH talk I see on this board, I think I might actually pick up a copy and see what all the fuss is about. Should I start with Vol. 1 or is there certain things discussed in each vol. that I could choose from and skip others? I can get a used copy of 1 on Amazon for under $10, so I'm thinking to start with that one?

Have to go in order.

[UNCpoker 0]

So after all this HOH talk I see on this board, I think I might actually pick up a copy and see what all the fuss is about. Should I start with Vol. 1 or is there certain things discussed in each vol. that I could choose from and skip others? I can get a used copy of 1 on Amazon for under $10, so I'm thinking to start with that one?

I would definately get vol. 1 and 2 and read them in order. I haven't had a chance to check out vol. 3 yet so have no idea on that one yet.

[iggymcfly 0]

I got it today (vol 3.) and so far I've been pretty unimpressed. Maybe it's just the scoring component that rubs me the wrong way, but I've found a lot of things that look like mistakes. For one thing, he advocates smooth calling a min-reraise with AA after putting an opponent on a range of KK-66. Also, he defends Hellmuth for making a smart play when he bets 600 into a 2400 pot on the turn with 33 when it was obvious his opponent was trapping.I haven't got into the heart of the book yet, and some of the insights in vol. 2 helped my tournament game a lot so I'm willing to give it a chance and keep reading, but so far it looks more like strat posts on FCP than super groundbreaking advice from a pro.Oh, and the multiple choice thing's obnoxious too. There was one spot where the choices were bet the pot or bet less than half the pot in a spot where I'd bet right around 2/3 of the pot almost every time.

[Dan The Man 0]

I loved Vol. 1 & 2, and just got 3 this week. I'm about 70 pages into the book, and already I feel like it's going to drastically improve my game. Can't wait to add up all my points at the end and find out what areas I need to work on.

[hblask 1]

I enjoyed the book, although I'm not sure I learned that much compared to the others. I also disagree with him on some of the questions. I don't have the book at hand, so I can't be specific, but in one example he suggests limping with high cards, I think AQs, but then calls the raise. Isn't one of the basic rules of poker "if you are willing to call a raise, just raise first"? Also, he seems to have forsaken probe bets and continuation bets in many examples when they seem like an obvious choice. If you have a middle pair, like 99, and the flop comes J52 and you are first to act, isn't that an automatic probe/continuation bet?Basically, I got frustrated with the book because his advice seemed to get sort of arbitrary, where one time he'd take one action and another a different action without much justification why the situations are so much different.One last thing: some of the examples have pros playing hands I wouldn't touch, ever. The correct thing to do is fold. If I decide to bluff and my opponent raises, I get out. If they raise again, I still get out. I don't donk away most of my stack hoping eventually they'll realize how much worse their hand is. So one of the big areas where I lost points was how to play crappy hands that I wouldn't be playing in the first place. After I get points for "fold", what does the rest matter?Overall, though, I still think it's a good exercise in seeing how at least one particular pro thinks.

[Dan The Man 0]

Just a side note, I read HOH3 and won two Sit & Go's in a row and finished second in the next one. Guess you could say something's rubbing off.

[hblask 1]

Just a side note, I read HOH3 and won two Sit & Go's in a row and finished second in the next one. Guess you could say something's rubbing off.

Before I read HOH 1-3, I used to get eliminated early in the second hour. Now I can usually make it to late in the second hour before I am eliminated. I guess that's progress.