I've previously mentioned in my Poker Romps that I am a sincere admirer of Arnold Snyder. He has done a lot for me. My poker tournament skills try to mimic the style in the Poker Tournament Formula.
Without hesitation I recommended the PTF to my buddy "Low" and it came almost as a shock that he didn't think highly of the book. Low said that, "Arnold's method isn't the way of winning tournaments." Perhaps my own judgment is clouded by my deep respect for Arnold. Objectively speaking, PTF has an average 4.5 star review from Amazon from many reviewers. Other meta evaluations rank his books accordingly high. The wisdom of the crowd has spoken. His methods have helped a lot of amateur players build their bankrolls.
I inquired further by asking Low why he felt PTF wasn't the way of making money. Him being a psychologist, he felt the people game in poker was the most important element. Low is a successful poker player playing the people game. As much as I like Low, I can't agree with his assessment.
In the legal profession, there's a standard called the "reasonably prudent person". What the reasonably prudent person is, is a legal work of fiction that tries to approximates the average opinion. We see in real life that reasonably prudent people have differing and contradictory opinions.
Ask reasonably prudent poker players what they believe to be the most important poker skill and you'll get a color swatch full of opinion. Some poker players like Low might think psychology is the most important aspect of the game. Others would say bankroll management. Some would say aggression. Others would say something else. PTF manages to capture all of the successful skills required to win poker tournaments.
I understand that players can profit from the people game, but the game of poker is not just a game of people. Cards do matter. Probabilities and pot odds do matter. Meta game analysis--beginning, middle, and end stages matter. Information advantage in the form of position matters. Utility of chips matter. Poker is not just a people game. It's a card game and subject to statistical principles.
The point is that people shouldn't be closed to the possibility of finding success in poker through other angles. Just because someone has found a sliver that is successful does not mean that it's the only means of success. On the opposite end, if you can't find any success playing the formulaic ways, look for something else.
Put in the time and effort to find different angles to exploit poker. This advice also applies to trading, blackjack, and any other game. There's always more than one way to beat the brains out of the competition. It won't be easy to find these advantageous angles, but they're very rewarding when you do find them.
In our conversation I spoke about my style of playing so far revolves very much around the behavior of the other players. I also said, I'm pretty limited right now in the knowledge of the game thus I rely on what I find works for my style of play. I've played four tournaments and went to the final table twice. Each time a learning experience. As far as poker goes, I know nothing.
In regards to Arnold's book, I do remember also saying I haven't finished reading it yet and so far from the first few chapters of what I've read it is not all there. Meaning, there's more to the game than aggressive play for small tournaments. I also pointed out that I would need to work on some areas such as bank roll management, pot odds, betsize, etc.. those of which are touched upon in Arnold's later chapters that I haven't read yet.
Although it wasn't your intention, I hope others who read this do not think of me as some arrogant kid who doesn't think highly of Arnold. The sound bites of my quotes were misunderstood and misquoted. My fault for not making it clear. I too, have a lot of respect for Arnold. I mean he's got something that works that made him millions and has the money to back his system up.
What do I have? nada.
I do agree with you in an aggressive style of play for small/fast tournaments but I do feel that there's more than just aggression. Some players you can be more aggressive towards while others you can not. This is where the psychology or rather human behavior comes in to play to help me determine what are the likelihood of my opponent bluffs. This aspect of the game helps me determine when to be aggressive. Arnold does mention the player types in chapter 8 of his book. It's a good book no doubt.