Second Opinion (as mine was a little tough!)
Mike Matros has a bachelors in mathematics from Yale and a MFA in creative writing from Sarah Lawrence, which is itself an interesting combination. One does not normally think of the two sides of the brain converging in a single person, but apparently, it has in the personality of Mike Matros. Matros is a rising tournament player who after writing this book placed 3rd in a WPT event, netting him over $700,000. That story, and others, is related in the book (as a postscript).
Poker books have been around for decades, but due to the sport's recent, explosive popularity, the market has seen a signficant increase in both the numbers published, as well as the creation of new sub-genres. Anyone who is in the market for a book on poker deserves to know where Matros's new poker book fits within this marketplace. Here's my shorthand for the sub-genres of poker books:
1. Technical and Strategic. These books seek to explain, not merely the rules of poker, but strategies and the technical mathemetics needed to become a winning player.
2. Poker Memoir. These books are more about the poker player than they are about poker. They recount stories of bad beats or significant events in the life of the player.
Works that fit #1 are absolutely essential reading for anyone interested in improving their game. Books by writers like Dan Harrington, David Sklansky and Mike Caro fit this category well. Works that fit #2 are not, in a sense, technically necessary but are enjoyable reads nonetheless if one loves the sport. A great example of an excellent memoir book is Michael Craig's recent THE PROFESSOR, THE BANKER AND THE SUICIDE KING, as well as Jim McManus's POSITIVELY FIFTH STREET.
Not all books are simply one or the other, because as the market has grown and expanded, hybrids that are a mix of the two have emerged. These books attempt to combine the best of #1 and #2, but in my experipence, rarely succeed. For instance, a hybrid poker book will focus on poker stories, as well as strategy, in an attempt to make poker strategy more readable and interesting. But in so doing, these books rarely provide enough technical depth on given situations or needed mathematics to be truly helpful. Thus, hybrid books will tend to be the weakest in those chapters that are devoted purely to strategy. An example of this is several of Phil Helmuth's books, which are more about Phil Helmuth than they are about poker.
I consider Matros's book a hybrid, and like most hybrid books I've read, it fails at offering substantive analysis and technical depth of the game. His training in creative writing is definitely evident in reading the book, as he is truly gifted writer of nonfiction. I found myself genuinely liking Matt after reading about him in tournaments. He also does a good job of putting the reader at the table, in certain hands - something which only talented writers can successfully do. He is like Michael Craig, in that sense - he is able to take you experientially into the tension and excitement of gambling, and that alone makes this book worth reading.
But I thought the book was weak in the chapters where Matros appeared to be providing technical information to the reader. For instance, the game theory chapter is slim on actual game theory. We learn nothing about solving actual games; we're simply recounted anecdotes involving problems suggested to an Internet discussion forum, and a prediction by Matros that game theory will one day revolutionize the science of poker. As an economist, I've heard this prediction before - not with poker, necessarily, but with any number of fields. It was once predicted that Chicago price theory would be supplanted by a game theoretic approach, but that day has not arrived, despite the signficant contributions to the field that game theory has made. Hence, Matros came across to me as more of a cheerleader in that chapter than he did someone who could open up the black box of game theory and relate it with relevance to a layperson.
Hence I felt the book was not balanced well, and suffered the fate of most hybrid poker books. It worked well as a narrative about poker-playing, but worked poorly at explaining poker strategy to the reader. Nevertheless, I think Matros understands poker very well, and the few nuggets I did get from the book on playing were helpful. A. Scott Cunningham "sc"
