Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com

David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth have both spent many years writing about the finer points of poker, blackjack, and other beatable games. (As you will see in the book those other "games" are horses, sports, progressive slots and video poker, casino tournaments, and special promotions. They don't include craps, roulette, keno, or baccarat for reasons explained herein.)

This book, however, was written for the not-quite-as-experienced aspiring gambler. It shows you everything you need to learn and do if you want to gamble for a living both from the practical and the technical standpoint. The rest is up to you.

Average Customer Rating:

How to lose your bankroll

Customer Rating:

I won't try to comment on most of this book because I'm an expert on only one type of game -- video poker -- so let's take a look at their "Jacks-or-Better Strategy Tips" on pages 145 - 146. Here's all I have been able to derive from their nine tips -- hold the first type of hand that appears in this table: Straight Flush 4-card Royal Flush High pair (jacks or better) 4-card Flush or 3-card Royal Low pair 4-card Straight 3-card Royal 3 high cards (but no Ace) 2 high cards 1 high card 3-card Straight Flush Obviously we can assume that a pat Royal Flush should be at the top, but this leaves us wondering: Is a 4-card Flush higher than a 3-card Royal? (No, it's lower.) Why is the 3-card Straight Flush at the bottom? (It should be above "3 high cards".) Is a 2-card Royal draw ever playable? (Yes, it sometimes is.) Should we ever break a pat Straight or Flush for a Straight Flush draw? (Yes, quite often.) Where do we put a 4-card Straight Flush, or the various inside Straight Flush draws? If this is typical of the advice on other games, then this book would be more aptly called, "How to lose your bankroll with gambling experts' tips." These authors should stick to writing about the subject they know -- medium limits poker.

The Worst 2+2 Publication I've Seen.

Customer Rating:

This is a cursory introduction to gambling and I've very skeptical about it making anyone a lot of money. Yes, David Sklansky is a great man, but no, this is not a great work. I agree that it is rather shallow and an illustration of a little bit of knowledge being dangerous (which is what it provides readers with as opposed to the knowledge of Sklansky and Malmuth which is quite deep). Anybody dumb enough to pursue a career in sports or horse handicapping after reading it is in serious trouble. The first fifth of the book is devoted to blackjack but I don't think it has much application to the current state of the game as the six to eight deck shoes are very hard on counters and the continuous reshuffle machines will leave anybody relying on blackjack to pay their bills destined to an address in debtor's prison (lol). With the poker section, there are about a million sources better than this one and I would hope that prospective gamblers read them carefully before embarking upon careers as professionals. Dated and superficial is a good way to describe this book and I wouldn't bother with it personally. I'm not surprised that they plug so many of their 2+2 books in these pages because they're all superior to this one.

Good introduction to gambling	Customer Rating:
This book gives the reader a good review of general gambling concepts and the different games available. To make 100k a year you'll need to get more specific material on the the gambling venue(s) of your choice.

money maker	Customer Rating:
I am a great fan of David Sklansky's work. I have bought several of his books. I did buy this and getting the best of it which are similar in content you may not need them both. Perhaps this one is the better of the two if I had to chose. If you can afford both get both however.

A clear introduction, but dated and a little shallow

Customer Rating:

Sklansky and Malmuth do a good job of introducing the reader to the world of gambling for a living. They make it clear just which games can be beaten and which can't (see below) and which may be beaten depending on circumstances (e.g., progressive slots and video poker). The authors also give a brief sketch of casino games that cannot be beaten (at least by normal means) such as craps, roulette, keno, etc, and point out why they can't be beaten. Clearly if you hope to make a living gambling you will become an expert on one (or more) of the four major games that can be beaten. They are horse race betting, sports betting, poker, and blackjack. The authors introduce the games with an emphasis on the circumstance and milieu in which you will find yourself. For example, if you are going to play blackjack for a living you have to get the basic strategy down pat, learn to count cards unnoticeably, and even learn to dress and behave appropriately so that it takes a long time for the pit bosses to realize that you are a winning player and throw you out. If poker is your choice then you'll have to learn the game(s) through experience (with some help from the literature). You'll start at the small games and work your way up, all the while making sure you have a sufficient bankroll separate from your living expenses. Sklansky and Malmuth make a big deal about this, but I can tell you from personal experience more would-be professionals failed because they couldn't or wouldn't play within their bankroll than for any other reason. It's called "gambler's ruin." Many of the guys I knew who managed to stay in the game year after year had a working wife or rich parents or some other means to fall back on after they went bust. The authors recommend from 200 to 300 times the big bet in your game as a minimum stake against a bad run of cards. This will vary depending on your variance, your style, how many hands you play, and against whom. Of course if you play too many hands you become a loser no matter how skilled you are. Play against the best players in the world and you also find yourself "on the rail," which is why Sklansky and Malmuth also recommend that you spend some serious time selecting the games to play in, that is, find the easiest games available at your bankroll and skill level. The section on sports betting is encouraging, as the authors show how the bookie's line can be beaten, but what the authors fail to say is that these opportunities (a line out of line, so to speak) come up much less often than bettors would like; in fact so seldom that unless you are betting tens of thousand of dollars on the games, it is very difficult to make a living betting on sports. Furthermore, behind the sly insights one might have into the psychology of a particular game situation--as opposed to an analysis of the comparative strengths of the teams ("power ratings")--is the assumption that (1) such factors are not already in the line; and (2) the sports bettor knows them better than the line makers. The only reliable way to beat sports betting in my opinion is to have intimate knowledge of the teams and to shop the line, that is live and breathe the teams like a fan (only with objectivity) and pick the best price given by several books. A professional line shopper I knew had a team of people who would bet for him in various cities across the country. Clearly in L.A. most bettors want to bet on the Dodgers so LA bookies overprice the boys in blue. But just the opposite is the case in Atlanta where the bookies overprice the Braves. Solution, bet on the Dodgers in Atlanta and on the Braves in LA! The main problem with this book, despite all the absolutely accurate assessment of the games, is, it's out of date. Written over ten years ago, it does not give the reader any information on Internet play and there is little that reflects the enormous increase in the tournament action both online and in the casinos. Furthermore, although Sklansky and Malmuth warn the reader gently that there's a lot of work to be done to get to the professional level, and again warn the reader that there are pitfalls along the way, they fail to convey--at least to my mind--just how hard it is be a successful gambler. Most people cannot do it. Furthermore, most people, if they could do it, would not because, frankly, it's a lot of work and can get boring. Playing poker or betting on sports can be a lot of fun if it's done just for fun and recreation, but if you have to grind it out, it can get tedious and you'll miss the sunshine and the greenery. One of the sad sights that I used to see in the clubs was a middle level professional running rough and absolutely hating to be there. You could almost hold your breath until he went completely on tilt. And that's why the rounder's dictum is that gambling is "a hard way to make an easy living." I don't think Sklansky and Malmuth are completely candid about the obstacles, both technical and psychological that challenge the prospective professional. They set out the cautions in a clear manner (the book is eminently readable), but they do not actually convey just how difficult it is to achieve the stated goal of making $100,000 a year gambling, mainly because for them--level-headed mathematicians fascinated by probability--it was not nearly as difficult as it would be for many others. I might also point out that Sklansky has now made more money writing books than he ever made playing cards.