Discussion about harrington on cash game vol I

[tmiby]

Hey guys,
i'm reading this book right now.wanna improve for 6max online.

In the past i was paying alot of attention to bvb play. Harrington shows up with this:
page 160
- we're getting 1:3 odds.You should play the top 80% of your hands
- limp 70%,raise 30%


My thoughts:
getting 1:3 and playing a range of 1:4...sounds like a good plan if you get some fold equity.but he only raises 30%. Your oop. imo,this is not profitable.
I would say i play like 70% of my hands.raising 60-70%. This is basically opponent dependent. When i get called a lot,i tighten up my raising range.

What do you think?

[ShoveOrFold]

HOH cash game is really outdated and not that applicable to online play imo. I read both and was not really impressed. He plays like a nit in a cash games and it doesn't really bode well in a 6m online game. There are a lot of examples in the books where you know thats not an optimal play in today's games.

I think you should be raising a good majority of your hands BVB. Your ratio seems fine. It really depends on your style of play and how comfortable you are playing 2nd best type hands.

[urbansprawler]

Originally Posted by ShoveOrFold

HOH cash game is really outdated and not that applicable to online play imo. I read both and was not really impressed. He plays like a nit in a cash games and it doesn't really bode well in a 6m online game. There are a lot of examples in the books where you know thats not an optimal play in today's games.

I think you should be raising a good majority of your hands BVB. Your ratio seems fine. It really depends on your style of play and how comfortable you are playing 2nd best type hands.

This. I did not like HOC pretty much...at all; the tournament series were as good as the cash series was bad. He advocates a lot of limping, something that is not advisable in today's games. I can understand, and often do, overlimping in 125bb+ games whilst in position, but limping the sb is just horrible anywhere.

[ShoveOrFold]

They are making a new HOH that is supposed to be about 6max and online play, so I am sure he will talk about stuff more applicable to our games.

[Nwodwols]

so let me get this straight - Harrington is a FISH and ya'll are the experts am I right? You have to got to be kidding me, please come down from your high horses and realise he would kick your ass any day of the week. Man how much stuff can people spew in a chat forum. Let me clarify, there are a few select few who are pumping out trash and urbansprawler is one of them.

How can Harrington's book be outdated? this is microstakes and he covers all kinds of stakes with full tables as well. His thoughts are well done in the chapters and clearly he explains in detail the answers he gives, yet 1 or 2 players come on here and in less than a few sentences trash harrington on cash and call it outdated. That to me is making this place less of a forum and more of a site with no substance.If you want to trash harrington state some facts with hands statistics etc... and back it up with the high stakes you play.

[urbansprawler]

Wtf are you ranting about?

[urbansprawler]

Harrington's book is terrible. He advocates things like open-limping often, he isn't as aggressive as one would think, and there are few useful things in HOC that you wouldn't find in this forum, if any at all. Total waste of money in my opinion, and yes, I think that if harrington and I played a HU cash game, I would have an edge. As well as every reg above 100NL.

[Nwodwols]

Originally Posted by urbansprawler

Harrington's book is terrible. He advocates things like open-limping often, he isn't as aggressive as one would think, and there are few useful things in HOC that you wouldn't find in this forum, if any at all. Total waste of money in my opinion, and yes, I think that if harrington and I played a HU cash game, I would have an edge. As well as every reg above 100NL.

Ok i need to know the answer to one simple question, is there anyone on here that thinks Urbansprawler can beat Dan Harrington because he is a better player at a cash game table ?

[TheDeKay]

Originally Posted by Nwodwols

Ok i need to know the answer to one simple question, is there anyone on here that thinks Urbansprawler can beat Dan Harrington because he is a better player at a cash game table ?

Maybe not Urbansprawler but there are plenty of 2kNL+ players on the internet, who could do it... and look at the games today and tell me, if any of those is following any advice of HOC.
His thoughts on balancing are somewhat ok, but actually you don't need to balance, if you play against weak players... so it's a waste of time to read that book as a micro-player.
+ Imo there are even plenty of bad advice in it...
Maybe you can apply it to live games, though - I don't know.

For me HOC was pretty much a waste of time and money.

Meh, and if you don't believe me feel free to play HU with me... or something along those lines

Originally Posted by tmiby

In the past i was paying alot of attention to bvb play. Harrington shows up with this:
page 160
- we're getting 1:3 odds.You should play the top 80% of your hands
- limp 70%,raise 30%

Uhm, yeah, you should definitely choose this kind of line, if you want to give away some free money
If not... why would you ever want to play oop with 80% of your hands against a somewhat competent player??? Actually I never tried it, but I have a pretty hard time playing like 25-30% of my hands in this spot with profit

[urbansprawler]

I definitely agree with theDekay. You make your hand super easy to read and to avoid this, you have to limp some good hands and balancing a limping range just isn't worth it.

FWIW Dekay I am pretty confident you and many other people here can at least break even versus harrington.