Rating: 
Summary: This book will not help you win.
Review: Carson's book is in no way complete. Nor will it help you much if you want to win. He's a mediocre player who's unable to take criticism, especially from better players/writers, as readers of the newsgroup rec.gambling.poker well know. Just read some of his posts.If you want to learn to player poker well, especially holdem, stick with authors David Sklansky, Mason Malmuth, Ray Zee, Roy Cooke, Bob Ciaffone, Doyle Brunson (Super System only), Mike Caro (Book of Tells Only) and John Feeney. These guys are winning players, know poker well, and explain it well. They don't write 'fluff' books (except where only a specific book was recommended). Other writers like Krieger and Jones are a step down, but better than Carson. Even worse than Carson is guys like Hellmuth, McEvoy and Cloutier. They have won a lot of tournaments but don't explain the difficult stuff and make a lot of mistakes. Don't be fooled by their success. If you want good reviews of poker books, get a copy of Mason Malmuth's book: Gambling Theory and Other Topics. In the back of this book (which is a great book, by the way) Mason reviews other gambling books, with a dedicated section on poker books. For more recent reviews, check out Mason's site: http://www.twoplustwo.com Then check out the fourm for books/software. You'll also see other's opinions of various books.
Rating: 
Summary: Insights Rather Than Directions
Review: Gary Carson offers ways to change your thinking about the game of Hold 'Em. I think the book a great buy for beginning and intermediate players. Firstly, while he does provide a chart of suggested starting-hands as do other Hold 'Em book authors, Carson also provides an entire chapter on the the theory of starting-hand values. It gave me an entirely new view of hand values and position. Secondly, he gives more new perspectives in the chapter on the theory of flop play. Again, not just directives but insight into defining your hand. His ideas on adjusting your thinking about poker hands from their poker ranking to their money-winning potential gave me a new way to evaluate my holdings. Finally, I thought his chapter on betting theory alone worth more than the cost of the book in itself. I've certainly more than recouped my money on what I consider to be the clearest and most consise explantions of bet, pot and implied odds. Before this book, I had only bet to get more money into the pot. Carson's list of reasons to bet immediately changed me into a more flexible player. You won't find a template of play in this book as you do in many others; you'll discover here ways to clarify your thinking that will allow you to make better playing decisions.
Rating: 
Summary: Has some value. Could be better.
Review: I found Gary Carson's book to be a tough read. Gary is certainly someone who know the ins and outs of poker, but the book just doesn't flow. After about half way through I was forcing myself to complete it. His basic points that you have to adjust your play to the table, and how to think about odds is valuable. It was just hard to get through it to find the nuggets of useful information.
Rating:
Summary: This is the one
Review: I have read "Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players", "The Theory of Poker", "Winner's Guide to Hold'em Poker", and "Ken Warren Teaches Texas Hold'em" in addition to this book. After reading all those, I was consistantly making profit, and placing in the top 4 or 5 in tournaments. After reading this one on a flim (because of another review here, actually), I won my first tournament. He teaches you how to think in Hold'em poker. The other books touch on that subject, especially "Ken Warren Teaches...", but its just not done in a way I was able to "get". I learn from books, not from being taught in a classroom, and this book is icredible in my opinion. At one point the author recommends reading some of the other books, but says you should finish his first: He couldn't have said it any better. I highly recommend this book for anybody who wants to learn how to play Texas Hold'em. To put in perspective, he only lightly touches no limit/pot limit games, or tournaments for that matter (although more than some of the other books), but yet the tournament I won was a no-limit. I think that speaks volumes!
Rating: 
Summary: Worth your time no matter who you are
Review: I have three books on poker. David Sklansky's "Hold'em Poker", Phil Helmuth's "Play Poker Like the Pros" and this book by Gary Carson. Each has it's pluses and minuses, and I would not catagorize any of them as "The Perfect Book on Poker". The thing I like the most about "The Complete Book of Hold'em Poker" over the Sklansky book is it's readability. There is a lot of info in Sklansky's book and I would recommend it, but it is just plain hard to read. Overall, if I had to choose amongst the three books I have I would take this book by Gary Carson. Phil Helmuth's book is also well written, but the content was lacking a bit. Carson and Sklansky covered more territory in their books and focused only on Hold'em. Thoughts are only valuable if they are communicated clearly.
Rating:
Summary: Much Better Written than Sklansky
Review: I have three books on poker. David Sklansky's "Hold'em Poker", Phil Helmuth's "Play Poker Like the Pros" and this book by Gary Carson. Each has it's pluses and minuses, and I would not catagorize any of them as "The Perfect Book on Poker". The thing I like the most about "The Complete Book of Hold'em Poker" over the Sklansky book is it's readability. There is a lot of info in Sklansky's book and I would recommend it, but it is just plain hard to read. Overall, if I had to choose amongst the three books I have I would take this book by Gary Carson. Phil Helmuth's book is also well written, but the content was lacking a bit. Carson and Sklansky covered more territory in their books and focused only on Hold'em. Thoughts are only valuable if they are communicated clearly.
Rating:
Summary: Much Better Written than Sklansky
Review: I have three books on poker. David Sklansky's "Hold'em Poker", Phil Helmuth's "Play Poker Like the Pros" and this book by Gary Carson. Each has it's pluses and minuses, and I would not catagorize any of them as "The Perfect Book on Poker". The thing I like the most about "The Complete Book of Hold'em Poker" over the Sklansky book is it's readability. There is a lot of info in Sklansky's book and I would recommend it, but it is just plain hard to read. Overall, if I had to choose amongst the three books I have I would take this book by Gary Carson. Phil Helmuth's book is also well written, but the content was lacking a bit. Carson and Sklansky covered more territory in their books and focused only on Hold'em. Thoughts are only valuable if they are communicated clearly.
Rating:
Summary: Good first book - just a little too broad
Review: I mostly want to reiterate what's already been said. This is a solid first poker book with enough "meat" in the form of both tabular data (starting hands, loose/tight and passive/aggressive tables rated for profitability, etc.) and in supporting text to explain the "why" behind the tables. Carson is a pretty good writer, and he's honest enough to say, "It depends," when that's the only good answer. E.g.: "I can't give you any hard and fast rules for when to call, raise, or reraise [preflop]" To his credit he doesn't leave it there (which would be useless for a beginner!) but develops some rules of thumb while stressing that they're never to be taken as gospel. His most important theme, that knowing and selecting your opponents is more important to profitability than memorizing how to play the cards, comes through clearly. The downside is well documented here but I'll just confirm it: The book tries to do a little too much. Some of the "special topics" chapters are truly useful, like the table selection material already mentioned. But some of them, like "Women and Poker," or "Poker and the Internet" are such a cursory treatment of the topic as to be of questionable value. Better to stick to the fundamentals! I didn't find the probability section quite as useful because I already knew the basics, but if you don't then count that a major plus. The two "Playing Some Hands" chapters are almost worth the price of the book themselves; I just wish there were more!
Rating:
Summary: The Complete Book of Hold 'Em Poker: Gary Carson
Review: I purchased this book when it was published and have read it several times. I have many other books in my poker library but this one has done the most to turn my game around. Carson gives another side of how to look at Holdem' poker. He doesn't give hard and fast rules to follow, instead he trys to get you to think. There is so much here to think about, I still go back to individual chapters and re-read them. When I run into trouble, or have the time to study poker, instead of play it that is. This book will pay for itself many times over.
Rating:
Summary: Hold off on "Hold 'em Poker"
Review: I recently began the lifelong journey of learning how to play this game. Like a lot of people, I have been watching the "World Poker Tour" on the Travel Channel (I don't work for either so its not a plug). The rules of the game are easy, but playing successfully is not. So, I decided to purchase this as my first book on the subject. There is good information in the book, but unfortunately it's obfuscated in the 300+ pages. One of the major problems with this book is that it seems to be intentionally long. The valid points presented, are re-presented many, many times over. I agree with a previous reviewer that the book is unstructured. It appears to be a series of chapters which have (on average) about a 30% overlap with other chapters. But that in and of itself wouldn't be so bad, except the book contradicts itself throughout. Gary makes such a point to convey that the table (game) must be taken in context, and that mathmatical determination of what hands to play doesn't make sense. However, he has many pages of tables which state what cards you should have, in what position, to take an action (bet, raise, fold). This is just one example. Even within specific chapters, he will spend 80% of the chapter getting a point across, only to contradict the point at the end of the chapter. Seems like he's just covering himself. But what is the point of that? As a reader I now have spent 20-40 minutes "learning" the technique only to discard it. What am I learning? The book has some serious structural issues with its conveyence of an approach on how to play the game. That is why we buy the book. We are the amateurs and he is (supposedly) an expert. We all know that rules are never 100% true, especially in a gambling context. However, we are seeking guidance on general approaches, and key points. I wish the author shortened the book to about 70 pages, which is ample for the relevant content, and I wish he would come forward with his position and advice on the game. As such, I cannot recommend this text as you will probably be as frustrated as I have been. I have moved on to "Hold 'em Poker" by Sklansky and Malmuth. I purchased it today and it already seems like a more informative and structured book. Good luck and see you at the tables!
| 
