i received a copy of hellmuths book yesterday and went straight to the stud8
section out of curiosity. there is some really dangerous advice in here.

first of all, he has a list of "premium hands" which way too long (pg 321).
for instance, #8 is "3 suited cards with an ace, one card 8 and under, and a
card above a 9." then #10 is "3 cards in a row like 456 or 567." he goes on
to say that a hand like (Ad 5d) Kd (notice that the K is up) is better than a
hand like (4d 5c) 6h or (67)8 with mixed suits (pg 320). he really seems to be
overvaluing flushes here. i'd much rather start with the 3 straights then a 3
flush with a brick, not to mention that brick being up. i think they are both
playable, but not in the order hellmuth has them listed.

further on, hellmuth talks about folding on 4th st. this is where it gets
really bad. first of all, he gives no context of what is going on in other
peoples hands in the examples he gives. he also makes no mention of dead
cards. he says, "if you've started with a premium low hand [remember this list
of premium hands he's given encompasses a lot] and now have caught a bad card,
then in general you should buy one more card (pg 325-6)." he clarifies "buy"
by saying you should take a card off. so he's pretty much saying, if you have
(Ac 7d) 8h (#9 in the list) and you catch a Qs, that you should stay in. i
know that there are situations where this can be applicable, but hellmuth is
making this sound like you should make this play every time, almost as if it is
automatic. the only way i play that situation would be if i was positive i was
the only low out. hellmuth makes no reference of context though. it seems
like a newbie reading this book will call with (A7)8Q when up agaisnt a (xx)52
or (XX)64, etc...

ok, so now that he's said that you should call one bet when you've caught bad,
how about 2 bets? he says that if you have 567 and catch bad on fourth you
should fold for two bets unless it seems like you are the only low (pg 326-7).
i may be wrong, but i dont like this play at all. if the brick was a 9 and i
was the only low, i would stay, but with a card like a K i cant see calling 2
bets a good play.

now hellmuth brings up this situation: "suppose you've started with (Ac 3c) 4c
and now you've caught the Qd. what do you do when its 2 bets to you? you call
quickly (pg 327)!" he says nothing about dead cards at all here. there could
be 6 clubs out and the player could be up against all wheel cards and he is
saying to call. how is a newbie supposed to think any different?

then regarding the same hand he says, "what do you do if its 3 bets?" he goes
on to say:

"first, i would be looking to see if one of my opponents has a pair of aces."
i find this a little vague. is he saying "see if someone has a pair of aces on
board"?

"second, id be taking note of all the other low up cards." oh great, thanks
phil. but bad news, i couldnt predict that i was going to be in this
situation, and i forgot all the dead cards from 3rd st. oh wait, i never even
took note of them. so i'll just look at the cards that are out now.

"third, id look to see how many clubs might be left in the deck, since i have a
club flush draw with my hand." how many clubs "might" be left in the deck?
what is that? this is just like #2. dead cards need to be remembered at the
start of the hand for every hand, not when you face some ridiculous situation
where you are thinking about calling 3 bets with an absolute blank in your
hand.

then he blesses us with this: "if all three of the above findings looked bad
for me, especially if i thought that someone already had a pair of aces or
trips then id fold my hand at this point. but because my starting hand was so
strong, id be looking for excuses to call (pg 327)!" this is terrible advice
for a new player. he's talking about calling 3 bets cold when he has a brick
for christ sakes.

there are also points in the section where he seems to be playing this game
from a high perspective. this is evidenced with the overvaluing of the 3flush
with a brick being ranked higher than the low 3 straight.

NNG

Well, I can't comment for the rest of it, but all the holdem info in it,
is invaluable. I wouldn't be winning as much as I am right now if it wasn't
for it. Caro's Tells are great, but I am not nearly as good at looking for
specific tells like that as I am just reading into players, just staring
them down and focusing on them, plus, using this advice, I learn more about
the player based on their betting style.

Jon

"Nng2000" <nng2000@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030804232601.13089.00000858@mb-m10.aol.com...
> i received a copy of hellmuths book yesterday and went straight to the
stud8
> section out of curiosity. there is some really dangerous advice in here.
>
> first of all, he has a list of "premium hands" which way too long (pg
321).
> for instance, #8 is "3 suited cards with an ace, one card 8 and under, and
a
> card above a 9." then #10 is "3 cards in a row like 456 or 567." he goes
on
> to say that a hand like (Ad 5d) Kd (notice that the K is up) is better
than a
> hand like (4d 5c) 6h or (67)8 with mixed suits (pg 320). he really seems
to be
> overvaluing flushes here. i'd much rather start with the 3 straights then
a 3
> flush with a brick, not to mention that brick being up. i think they are
both
> playable, but not in the order hellmuth has them listed.
>
> further on, hellmuth talks about folding on 4th st. this is where it gets
> really bad. first of all, he gives no context of what is going on in
other
> peoples hands in the examples he gives. he also makes no mention of dead
> cards. he says, "if you've started with a premium low hand [remember this
list
> of premium hands he's given encompasses a lot] and now have caught a bad
card,
> then in general you should buy one more card (pg 325-6)." he clarifies
"buy"
> by saying you should take a card off. so he's pretty much saying, if you
have
> (Ac 7d) 8h (#9 in the list) and you catch a Qs, that you should stay in.
i
> know that there are situations where this can be applicable, but hellmuth
is
> making this sound like you should make this play every time, almost as if
it is
> automatic. the only way i play that situation would be if i was positive
i was
> the only low out. hellmuth makes no reference of context though. it
seems
> like a newbie reading this book will call with (A7)8Q when up agaisnt a
(xx)52
> or (XX)64, etc...
>
> ok, so now that he's said that you should call one bet when you've caught
bad,
> how about 2 bets? he says that if you have 567 and catch bad on fourth
you
> should fold for two bets unless it seems like you are the only low (pg
326-7).
> i may be wrong, but i dont like this play at all. if the brick was a 9
and i
> was the only low, i would stay, but with a card like a K i cant see
calling 2
> bets a good play.
>
> now hellmuth brings up this situation: "suppose you've started with (Ac
3c) 4c
> and now you've caught the Qd. what do you do when its 2 bets to you? you
call
> quickly (pg 327)!" he says nothing about dead cards at all here. there
could
> be 6 clubs out and the player could be up against all wheel cards and he
is
> saying to call. how is a newbie supposed to think any different?
>
> then regarding the same hand he says, "what do you do if its 3 bets?" he
goes
> on to say:
>
> "first, i would be looking to see if one of my opponents has a pair of
aces."
> i find this a little vague. is he saying "see if someone has a pair of
aces on
> board"?
>
> "second, id be taking note of all the other low up cards." oh great,
thanks
> phil. but bad news, i couldnt predict that i was going to be in this
> situation, and i forgot all the dead cards from 3rd st. oh wait, i never
even
> took note of them. so i'll just look at the cards that are out now.
>
> "third, id look to see how many clubs might be left in the deck, since i
have a
> club flush draw with my hand." how many clubs "might" be left in the
deck?
> what is that? this is just like #2. dead cards need to be remembered at
the
> start of the hand for every hand, not when you face some ridiculous
situation
> where you are thinking about calling 3 bets with an absolute blank in your
> hand.
>
> then he blesses us with this: "if all three of the above findings looked
bad
> for me, especially if i thought that someone already had a pair of aces or
> trips then id fold my hand at this point. but because my starting hand
was so
> strong, id be looking for excuses to call (pg 327)!" this is terrible
advice
> for a new player. he's talking about calling 3 bets cold when he has a
brick
> for christ sakes.
>
> there are also points in the section where he seems to be playing this
game
> from a high perspective. this is evidenced with the overvaluing of the
3flush
> with a brick being ranked higher than the low 3 straight.
>
> NNG

>i received a copy of hellmuths book yesterday and went straight to the stud8
>section out of curiosity. there is some really dangerous advice in here.

You actually paid for this book? Phil Hellmouth knows as much about Stud 8 as I
know about computers.


The complete book of STUD 8, by Russ Georgiev coming to a website soon.

Russ Georgiev