A friend of mine recently sent me a copy of the Mike Matusow book, Check-Raising the Devil, so I thought I’d type up some thoughts on it.
While I have read reviews to the contrary, I actually found the writing in this book exceptionally poor. Presumably Mike Matusow was not responsible for that aspect of the book and his co-writers are to blame. The incorrect use of commas, can be very jarring to the reader (see what I did there?). Additionally, the book frequently violates the ‘show don’t tell’ guideline, and amateurishly attempts to end each chapter with some sort of serial comic book cliffhanger, e.g., ‘I thought I would go to the grocery store the next day. But I was wrong.’
As for the content of the story, Matusow undoubtedly has an interesting story to tell. However, much of the book runs as little more than a highlight reel. Anyone who has watched televised poker in the past few years will already be familiar with must of the story – the repeated run-ins with Greg Raymer, the ‘Vindication Baby’ Aruba tournament, the WSOP run-in with Shawn Sheikhan, attempting to tackle Mr. Peanut, etc.
While Matusow attempts to explain the context of each situation, there is very little in the way of genuine discussion of his motives or exploration of his thought process. In the end his rationalizing is often feeble and amounts to little more than hand waving, ‘but in any event that’s what I did.’ It is unclear if Matusow is refusing to delve more deeply or if he’s just completely out of touch with his feelings and thoughts.
For example, his lapse into illegal drug usage is recounted without any sense of accountability. According to Matusow it just sort of happened. He seems incapable of admitting that he did anything wrong, most notably in his infamous drug sell incident. One is left to wonder if he really is so ignorant of social mores or if he’s just entirely devoid of a personal moral compass.
Because Matusow is inarguably a great poker player it is worth mentioning strategy, though the book does not claim to have a strategic component. Though there is very little overall analysis of hands it is evident that Matusow plays mostly on intuition. Unfortunately he is often unable to explain his thought process beyond factually stating his conclusion. Furthermore, mathematical errors are rampant in the book: misreading of board textures and miscounting outs, describing a two outer as a bigger miracle on the river than on the turn turn (which I will admit may have been more of a lexical error), arguing for a fold of top pair plus the nut flush draw in Limit Hold ‘Em when facing a top pair hand with a better kicker (due to the structure of the game it would be difficult to construct realistic scenarios where the pot size would make this play correct), etc.
Ultimately I was disappointed that someone who feels so deeply was not able to better explain and discuss his feelings, nor utilize them correctly. For example, I found it discouraging how Matusow would refer to his ‘friends.’ At one point in the book he notes how many people in the party scene abandoned him when he got clean, but he never seems to quite make the connection that they were never truly his friends to begin with. This was the only time I really truly found Matusow to be a sympathetic character. Perhaps in the end Matusow is really just a confused and lonely person.
No comments:
Post a Comment