Tournaments Books

I completely agree that Phil Helmuth has one of the biggest egos out there today. However, this book is phenomenal. It's the perfect choice for the new or intermediate player and covers all types of poker games. Since I have been listening to it, my game has become more profitable, and that's 100% true. Trust a poker player! ;-) Actually, it really has become more profitable, both Hold'em and Omaha. I know that Helmuth can turn people off because of his Muhammed Ali "I'm the greatest" routine, but his game is all there. If you are looking for a CD, this is an excellent one, as is Phil Gordon's. However, this CD is more encompassing of other poker games which makes it even more valuable. Buy it. Rent it. Download it. Just get it.

This CD set was just a re-hash of his other books...Great Bluff Phil

Total waste of time. Phil Helmuth is the biggest ARSE out there. It's all about Phil. That said, I respect his tournament playing ability but unfortunately that didn't carry over to his instructional side. If you are looking for a good book on tape about poker, Phil Gordon's CD is excellent. I've listened to it multiple times and have gleemed little things here and there from it. It has a great odds section too. Stay away from all Phil Helmuth products, they are only glorifications of the Poker Brat.

This book is very poorly written. It is as sickening to endure as a high-school pep rally. "You can do it! Keep trying, you'll get there! Rah Rah Rah". There is a lot of useless blather and no real content or strategy for playing in poker tournaments, just lists of general and vague advice. It is mostly just a bunch of quotes from professional players taken from other books, magazines, etc. I don't think the author interviewed any of the people she quotes in the book, and if she did, it is not apparent. Also, this book addresses mostly re-buy tournaments. Freeze-outs are mentioned in passing, but not really discussed. Then again, nothing in this book is really addressed anyway. If you are a beginner do what I did: Go to your local bookstore, buy a cup of coffee and read this thin tome (140 pages or so) in about an hour and put it back on the shelf. If you are an experienced tournament player, just get the coffee and skip the book.

I agree with the previous critic. Anyone looking for specific tournament poker tactics with example hands will be disappointed. The book amounts to nothing more than the type of common sense, but practically useless, advice that a father might give his young son before his very first tournament. Anyone who finds this book insightful instead of thinking "Duh!" at every turn of a page, should probably not play in poker tournaments just yet, since all the information given is purely and exclusively common sense advice.

I disagree with the other reviews on this site. This book is targeted for the tournament novice. If you are out there winning thousands of dollars in poker tournaments, then you obviously don't need this book. However, for someone who has no idea how a live poker tournament works, this is an excellent reference guide. Yes, some of the advice falls under the category of "duh" (e.g. "Fold marginal hands"), but I've played in several tournaments and many live games, and have made a lot of money off of the people who don't follow the advice outlined in this book. Notice the subtitle is "How To Win at Low Limit Poker." The key word is "Low Limit." This book is not for high rollers. However, it does provide sound strategies that, when coupled with experience, can produce winning results. I've won two online tournaments employing some of the basic strategies in this book. I'll admit it is a bit pricey for the content, but it is a cheap investment if you make the cost back with a winning hand or two. This book coupled with Larry Phillips "The Tao of Poker" forced me to look at how I was playing and my decision making process. What might be common sense advice to one player may be news to another.

To quote the late sacred elder of Western research and writing, C. Leland Sonnichsen, "I don't see why this book had to be written!" The reason is that the writer had pre-selected his conclusion and considered only information that tended to prove his prejudice. This is so obvious as to turn off an unbiased reader.

Save your money. This book is unsliced baloney.

In this his third book, author DeMattos examines referee Wyatt Earp's decision in the Decmber 1896 heavyweight boxing match between Tom Sharkey and Bob Fitzsimmons. Although this wasn't a championship bout it aroused intense interest among San Francisco's gambling fraternity. It's clear Earp's participation in this fight proved very damaging to his reputation as it allowed newspapers to rake over his controversial past; to print false information; and to patronize his alleged "two-gun" image.

DeMattos uses contemporary articles from the San Francisco newspapers, (Call, Chronicle, Examiner) to present his story. The book has interesting editorial cartoons from 1896, which complement the text. The author's reliance on the Examiner's version of the bout rises and falls based the accuracy and/or bias of the reporters. Fault can be found as DeMattos doesn't amplify beyond what is printed in the Examiner (and to a lesser degree in the Call) leaving the impression Wyatt Earp was probably involved in a fix.

There were rumblings in the Fitzsimmons' camp that the fight was fixed and Earp, as referee, was in on the fix. He denied the charge and offered to withdraw. Both fighters and their managers agreed to employ Wyatt Earp as the fight was imminent and they had previously rejected all of the other proposed referees. The Chronicle claimed Earp got the "job (as it) was considered undesirable." Wyatt Earp had some experience as a referee but none with the Marquis of Queensbury rules and certainly none with the notoriety of this bout.

Earp awarded the fight to Sharkey due to an alleged disabling foul committed by Fitzsimmons. Over the intervening years a variety of "authorities" have denounced Earp's judgment as a flagrant, if not crooked, decision basing their opinions on personal biases and/or statements made by Earp's contemporaries with axes to grind. After the fight, Earp's early years were raked over and outrageous incidents were manufactured and reported as fact by at least one newspaper who created a conspiracy ostensibly because of Wyatt's friendship with the owner of a competing San Francisco paper.

During the fight, both fighters were often clumsy, wrestling and pushing each other around the ring. Sharkey was very short, very strong, easy to hit, hard to hurt, and very unscientific. Fitzsimmons was tall, a bulked-up middleweight, a good defensive fighter, a hard puncher, and an accomplsihed fouler. Each struck the other more than 50 times but often missed their target. Sharkey hit the canvas four times and Fitzsimmons three times. The fight was fairly even (Fitzsimmons slightly ahead) until the eight round when Fitzsimmons threw his "infamous" solar plexus punch (presently outlawed in boxing matches) which can foul an opponent if not delivered precisely. Fitzsimmons was known as a "cute" fighter who was not adverse to fouling an opponent with clever ploys including an elbow follow-through, and a low solar plexus punch. Sharkey also fouled by hitting on the break, gouging, and "bulling" an opponent around the ring. Nineteenth cnetury boxing referees expected fouling during a fight but were primarily concerned with fouls that disabled a fighter.

Prize fighting with gloves wasn't legal in the United States. While the bout had no legal standing in a court of law the public was treated to a "Kangaroo" court conducted by newspaper reporters. (The prize money was initially held up after the bout but was released when judge denied jurisdiction) In 19th century boxing matches, a referee such as Wyatt Earp often decided the outcome of a bout. This power was double edged as a referee could get into serious trouble with an unruly crowd that favored one of the fighters or with gamblers who stood to lose a lot of money. Referees were known to have fled a boxing ring at the end of a fight and to have rendered their decision a day or so later, many miles from the scene. In one major battle, a referee was threatened between rounds with a knife and was shot at after the fight ended.

Problems encountered by a reader are alleged stories of Earp's past life without any attempt by the author to prove whether they were accurate. Three patently false stories concern a fixed horse race, a gold brick scam, and claim jumping all of which Wyatt Earp allegedly masterminded.

Did Wyatt Earp fix the contest for Sharkey? It's a tough call for a reader to make at this late date with all the conflicting information presented in this book. Fixed fights weren't uncommon in the 19th century. There are indicators to support either side of the argument. To give Wyatt the benefit of the doubt: he had been warned in advance that he was going to fix the fight; he had little time to blend into a complicated scam that fixed fights require; there was no proof that he made any money from the fight other than the referee's cut; his friend Bat Masterson had bet on Fitzsimmons; Fitzsimmons' famed solar plexus punch often bordered on a foul; six doctors examined Sharkey and certified he was fouled; and Fitzsimmons was involved in another boxing match wherein he lost due to a similar foul.

This book will be of interest to aficionados of Wyatt Earp if only to argue about its premise. It can also prove frustrating as the author did not do a professional job of checking his facts, in particular, his lack of knowledge about the early fight game. He also seems to have accepted certain stories about Wyatt Earp with little effort made to prove or disprove their validty. While Waytt Earp wasn't a saint, he wasn't the epitome of original sin.

I am a fan of Kim Greenblatt's books (fair warning) and I know a portion of his proceeds go to Rett Syndrome research (so that is part of my bias). That being said, the book has typos but to be fair, a lot of poker books do as well.

His examples in this book are tedious to me but there are moments of something happening periodically. My assumption is the lesson he wants to teach is patience. He has some examples of hand comparisons at the end of the book that are okay. Sample pages are on the internet through his poker book website if this is your cup of tea.

He always asks if the reader has learned at least one thing that justifies the cost of the book. I can honestly say that I picked up two things. Was the cost of the book justified? For me it was. Is my game going to improve? Time will tell. I think there were some examples that drove home that there is a tendency in low limit $40 NL games for people to try and get fancier than they should (just my opinion).

For the record, he is a self publisher and not a vanity press.

To be fair, I quit this book after taking as much abuse as I could. I don't know the author nor his/her real credentials, but the quality of the writing is just terrible. Maybe the author is a nice person, but I would opine that English is not their forte.

But aside from the awkward phrasing and occasional outright misspelling (nad instead of and) that any spell check would have corrected, the book's content is limited and of questionable value. The book does not appear to have a publisher, which leads me to believe that is was self-published at some vanity press printer in West Hills, CA or thereabouts.

The book gives you series of hands that were supposedly played by the author in brick-and-mortar ring games and sit-n-gos but gives everyone's hole cards. Quite a casino! I don't get to see the hole cards of the loser in a showdown in Vegas, how about you?

Some of the example hands are: I bet, everyone folded and I picked up the blinds. I personally can't get much out of that.

The margins of this book are over an inch in all sides on this 5.5" x 8.5" book. The type is not too large, but the whopping margins keeps the page count up and the content down. That, coupled with the nonsensical filler hands, just doesn't leave much for the money.

I can't really give an accurate judgment of the advice as I just had to put the book down at page 31. Thus, I can't pass judgment on any poker wisdom that was going to be dispensed in future pages. All I know is that I would greatly like to sit at a $2-$5 NLTH table with this player.

Caveat emptor.

BTW, if you want a good book on no-limit cash games written by a real bona fide NLTH expert (with a publisher and everything), I suggest the excellent tome by Angel Largay.

This guy is a no-talent hack who got lucky. He only marginally understands the math and strategy behind blackjack tournaments. This book was an attempt to take financial advantage of his winning the WSOBJ and I'm sorry to say I bought it. Complete waste of money. Only worthwhile book on blackjack tournaments is Wong's Casino Tournament Strategies and unfortunately it is slightly outdated, but still very worth it. Einiger is really an idiot, this book is terrible. Just a bunch of personal stories that are not very interesting.

I watched the WSBJ and saw Ken win. I didn't find this to be an in-depth strategy book, but Ken doesn't claim it to be. I did, however, find his play-by-play commentary of the last few hands in each round very interesting. I enjoyed reading about his thought process and learning that even World Champions sometimes make mistakes!

Why on earth do you need a strategy guide for a fighting game? And don't tell me that it gives you all the moves, pause the game and you can get a list of all the moves! I own this guide, but only because it was given to me by someone else who got it for free from a store that couldn't sell it. It is terrible, and it doesn't tell you anything interesting, or that any half-brained moron couldn't find out for themself by pressing buttons.

This book is not bad at all, the only problem i have is that they do not include any juggle combos. All the moves are here and this time it is a little better than the tekken three layout. The combos are a lot easier to understand, specially king's grab combos and trhows. Overall i give it a 4 out of 5 because there are other guides that cover the same info, but went out of their way and included some juggles that can be performed in this great game.

This is it first time I've reviewed a book on amazon and I'm only doing it because this is the most poorly written book I've ever read. Or attempted to read, I couldn't make it past page 31.

I'm an infrequent golfer that rarely breaks 100 but even I know that the errors in this book are as bad as writing a book based in the United States and having car drivers drive on the wrong side of the road. Nearly every "fact" regarding golf and in particularly professional golf is wrong in the first 30 pages. By page 30 when there were so many errors I couldn't finish the book, I decided to write this review. And I was stuck on a plane with several hours to go with nothing to read, and I still couldn't continue the book.

Page 30...
The progessional golfer only has ONE ball that he FOUND the day before in a sand trap on the Masters course that apparently someone had left there for him to find, yet his caddie told him he had just BOUGHT some balls for him. The golfer with the one ball is said to be in the ROUGH at the Masters and needed a machete to get out.

No professional golfer would lose a ball in a sand trap so none could have been found.
Pro don't buy balls, they receive them as part of endorsement deals.
There is no real rough at the Masters, anything off the fairway that could be called the rough is lower than your front lawn, and certainly not junglelike.

etc. etc. I could go on but why bother.

In addition to be totally wrong with every golf fact, quite frankly, the book is just poorly written. Every attempt at humor is flat and there is just nothing to suggest it will get better in any way.

John McCree and Conner Cross have been friends and golf pros for years and they're both playing in the Masters. Conner finds John's dead body in the sand trap at the eighteen hole. Grisly as the murder was, the game goes on. John's wife asks Conner to investigate, since the police don't seem to be getting anywhere, and then another body shows up.

This is a great five star story with nice humor. That said, it always bothers me when an author's fans get upset because the writer tried something new. I don't know why readers expect writers to keep churning out the same book again and again. So what if this one's a little different than Bernhardt's previous books. To that I say "Bravo," because anybody can steer along the safe road, it takes courage to take a different path.

Reviewed by Vesta Irene

This is probably the worst book ever written. Obviously Mr. Bernhardt knows nothing about golf and Ballatine Books should never have published it. Now I know why it was only $1 at our library sale. It is a 'tee box' not a 'tee off', people 'play golf' not 'golf' and who would even think that a 9 iron would be an alternate club to a driver? Augusta should sue for defamation of character. Aside from the golf gaffs, the plot was perdictable and stupid. Do even ask about the dialogue. Don't waste your time.

The dialogue is so bad that it makes you forget how ridiculous the plot is. Do not, under any circumstances, even look at this book. Its only purpose in life is as a paper weight.

Let me make this quick. I really like Ben Kincaid and have no intention of discontinuing buying and reading Mr. Bernhardt's books. However, I wish I had read the reviews posted on Amazon before picking this book off the bargain table at a not-to-be-disclosed local bookseller. It was below average as mystery and just plain awful as a golf story. STAY AWAY!

This book has a good promise but ultimately falls short of covering what the title proclaims. First of all, the version I got didnt have the games attached to the book. This was sad, since the author spends some precious pages describing the rules of the games I did not get. There are only 64 pages in this book. I actually found the text very interesting, but the illustrations kill this book. Its simly a collection of bad quality black and white engravings and sketches from the period, plus some heraldic designs IN BLACK AND WHITE. Some original illustrations, ala Osprey would have been much nicer. Oh, and by the way, not a single word on medieval wargames. Terence Wise has a much cheaper book about medieval warfare, that has a nice section on wargames. And it was much cheaper.

I do not like it. Feather broke only 2 or 3 shots (which we used). Even you can not play game for short period using same shuttlecock. i wouldn't recommend you to buy for this shuttlecock.

With Kasparov's name on the title page I was looking forward to analysis on par with his other Pergamon/Cadogan books on matches 2 (New World Chess Champion) and 3 (London/Leningrad Championship Games). I was sadly disappointed. The analysis in here is very weak, on the level of what Keene usually provides in his hack jobs. I recommend the book by Karpov's team (ISBN 0812919238) instead.