If the first few years of the new millennium brings as many changes to poker as the last few years leading up to it, poker players will be in for an exciting ride. At the present time, Texas hold'em as established itself as the king of the poker world, but seven card stud and Omaha variations are also popular. In Poker at the Millennium, two of the best known poker authors, Mike Caro and Mike Cappelletti write about two of these top three games and consider their place in the new poker age.
At the beginning of the book the authors lay out for the reader the topics they intend to discuss. At a high level they compare Omaha high and high-low split, bankroll issues, and mention other "groundwork" topics. The authors do not shy away from controversy, and from the very beginning they make statements with which many serious poker players are likely to disagree. For example, Cappelletti opines that "Professional players ... like hold'em because by playing a simple formula ... they are virtually guaranteed a long term profit." I can't say I agree with this sentiment. In fact, many expert players in both games would argue that this statement is more true regarding limit Omaha than limit hold'em. Obviously, Cappelletti feels differently.
The next 120-odd pages feature Mike Caro expounding on the game of hold'em with the occasional commentary from Cappelletti. I found this section to be an interesting mixed bag, although at times it can be tough to follow Caro's lead. Many times the author tosses out an idea that I think deserves more thorough explanation. For example, he claims that most of a hold'em player's profit comes from pre-flop decisions. I don't agree, but I'd like him to explain in some detail why he thinks this is the case. At the same time, I found much of his material to be intriguing and some of it to be new and insightful. This is not the best hold'em material I've ever read, but I believe that many experienced players might be able to derive some benefit from it.
Most of the rest of the book is a discussion of Omaha by Mike Cappelletti with occasional commentary from Caro. As it is his favorite game, Cappelletti considers the many variations of Omaha. While he provides considerable discussion about Omaha high-low split, he spends a great deal of time on the topic of limit Omaha high. This seems odd to me, since limit Omaha high games don't seem terribly common at the present time. In fact, I know of only two casinos in the world who claim to spread the game on a regular basis. There certainly may be several more of which I'm not aware, but in any event, high-low split games outnumber the high-only games by a wide margin.
Cappelletti doesn't always go out of his way to make it absolutely clear which type of Omaha game he's discussing. At several points in the book I was wondering whether he was talking about high-low split games or not, and it often took me a while to feel like I knew for certain what the proper context was. Also, he often talks about fairly vague concepts such as "premium draw" or "marginal hand". These terms are used often but examples are seldom provided. Is top and bottom pair a marginal hand? I'm guessing it depends on the circumstances. I wish I had a better feeling for what the author thought those circumstances might be.
The book concludes with the authors discussing the differences between these two types of games and an appendix where Caro presents the most exhaustive pre-flop hold'em strategy I've seen in print. Basically, he goes over every possible starting hand in every position under every betting circumstance for limit, pot-limit, and no-limit hold'em. In his introduction, Caro himself backs away from it a bit, claiming that while it may not be the best strategy, it might be useful as a different gear to use when the game calls for a change of pace. Again, I don't think I agree with all the recommendations, but it's interesting material. I think, though, that I'd like to hear from Caro why he thinks some of these are appropriate strategies, especially some of the plays that are likely to be controversial.
Poker at the Millennium also suffers from some fairly rough editing, but the book is by no means devoid of value. While I find some of the hold'em advice inscrutable, much of it is intriguing. While I found it difficult to get a firm grasp on much of the Omaha advice, most of it was straightforward and sensible. I don't think this would be a good first poker book, nor do I think it should become a primary source for poker players, but there is enough that's interesting here that I certainly don't regret reading it. I would think that many thoughtful, widely read, experienced poker players are likely to find enough interesting ideas in its pages to make reading this book worthwhile. So, for well-read poker players who are looking for something that will make them think about their game, Caro and Cappelletti just might be the ticket.
Overall, I don't think this is an especially strong book. Caro's section is hard to follow; filled with quick cuts, interesting directions, and controversial throw-away ideas that need to be more fully explored. Cappelletti's section on Omaha has both some straightforward advice and some controversial ideas about the game itself, although these sections are not as clearly written as I'd like. The book does have its moments, and a well-read poker player may find enough here to make it worth puzzling through. However, I expect that most players would likely find a better match for their needs somewhere else.
Click here to return to the index of reviews.