Small Stakes Hold 'em: Winning Big With Expert Play

I've read most of the poker lit and really like the Lee Jones low-limit book. It is accessible and provides pretty good advice on how to play the lower limit tables. Since most of the books out there assume you are playing good (read tight / aggressive) players, it was an important book for me. If you use the 'good play' paradigm at many loose tables, you play hardly any hands, and get bad beat too often -- so frustrating. Still profitable, but it always felt like I wasn't winning as much as I should given the (I believed) clear difference in game knowledge and good play practices.
I bought and read this book last week and was skeptical about much of its advice. It is not an easy read -- has the typical mathematic slant of a Sklansky book -- not in itself bad, but don't expect to breeze through this is an afternoon if you are not already familiar with calculating odds, etc. In my opinion the book often suggests raising on the assumption someone may be bluffing in a big pot situation and doesn't stress enough about factoring in your table read where you know you are beat (and therefore maybe just call or even fold). It also is short of detailed advice on turn and river play. The quizes in the back are good, but are light on a theoretically foundation of guiding play other than counting outs and a brief section on how to discount outs that may not really be there (get Ciaffone's Middle-limit Poker for this) I felt it was recommending WAY too loose guidelines and advice around staying in big pots when you KNOW you are beat (KNOW as in 'I've been at the table four hours and that guy only raises when he has the nuts -- I am beat).
Anyway, this weekend I went to the local Harrah's and played their 5/10 game (5/10 is the lowest limit), used the guidelines from Small Stakes Hold-em and proceeded to win 100 big bets in eleven hours. Wow. Of course, this is a sample set of one. And things generally went really well -- good cards, not too many river beats, etc. And the table makeup most of the evening fit the profile this book addresses to a tee. I didn't ignore my own reads at the table, etc. and played a bit tighter than the book recommended, but definitely the book influenced my approach to the game.
I still have mixed emotions about many of the suggestions in this book. I think that if you are an experience player used to playing tougher competition, this book should be viewed as filling out your knowledge in a poker niche of the highly-loose / somewhat-passive-hold'em variety. If you read this book as your first book because you are going to play low-limit and then run into a tight or aggressive table (whatever the limit), you are going to get killed. In other words this is a book for advanced players who understand 'correct' play. This book helps you optimize play for a certain specialty situation.
The book basically puts you on notice about this, but it is easy to lose track of while you read. Individually poor players when encountered as a group present certain challenges. The inmates are running the asylum and you have to get a little crazy yourself to a certain extent when you likely have the best of it. You do this knowing full well you are going to win fewer pots, but the size of the pots compensate. Judging the right and wrong time to join in (and stay in) is basically the specialty knowledge this book provides. It requires some sophistication and experience to understand
I'm pretty sure a good many people are going to lose a good deal of money using this book as their bible. That's why I say this book is really valuable, but dangerous medicine. Don't make it the anchor point of your poker knowledge. Once you have that core down, this will help you win more when you play loose / passive small-stakes games.