|
|
 Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
First concerning the two or so times you referred to poker as being a "lottery" or alot of luck.
I don't think Poker is luck in the professional level. All poker pros are where they are because of consistent skill in implied analyzing, out-counting, and hand odds. The reason why I said what I said was because Slevin referred to 2NL as a lottery and 10NL as a stake he could beat. This bothered me a lot because that reasoning can cause huge devastation to his bankroll when he hits a cold deck. I can only crack his reasoning by giving him reasons why that reasoning is flawed. If 2NL is a lottery to him, 10NL is no different. I think I didn't explain this reasoning in my post, so it looked as if I was calling the whole game a gamble. To the non-professionals, yes. To the veterans, probability wins.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
On the WAY too aggressive bit.
Sorry. Again this was only directed at Slevin. I sincerely think he plays overly aggressive, and I think that's one of his leaks. His opponents somehow are picking it up, or are too loose to know better. I think aggression is KEY in victory for NLHE, just like you. I don't think its something Slevin should do at the state he is in now. Out of the many hands I've read on Slevin's operations, he goes broke on a huge bet, raise, or call. I don't think a great poker player should just go broke just on these situations alone. I've gone broke several times from being short stacked and blinded off. Slevin was moderate-deep stack in most of his situations where he got stack jacked, and if you're losing consistently with a big stack--something is wrong. Low bets should cause the same intimidation from him as huge bets, because people generally don't want to mess with the large stack unless they have a good hand or are getting good implied odds (i'll raise with air connectors if they're trying to bully me). People are somehow picking this leak from Slevin.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
And concerning the "too aggro without the nuts" remark. You will rarely get the absolute nuts. This doesn't mean you can't be aggressive. The strength of your hand is based on numerous factors. The board texture, the previous actions, villain tendencies, etc... all play a major part in determining you hand strength. So if you are being aggressive in hopes of getting value from your hand you must consider all those factors. As we know against some players we hate felting hands like TPTK, but against others we are happy to get it all in. This is because we have done a range assessment and determined how our hand falls in relationship to our opponents percieved range.
I completely agree 100%
This sentence is what you would read in every good holdem book.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
At 2nl, I highly advice that your preflop raising size should be larger than 2.5xbb. This is because most players at 2nl are passive calling stations. And it's because of this you should be playing a tighter range.
I think I may be lucky then. I play at Pokerstars and I usually pick tables on .02-.05 NL with 50%+ pot avg. Generally, a 15-25cent raise scares everyone off. The problem with Slevin's raise was that he was raising 40-50 cents with 3$. This may be the biggest thing where we have our differences, but I treat my stack absolutely as my bankroll. I will not lose my stack because my bankroll can pamper it. This definitely can limit my playing, but I had a huge problem with self-control earlier because I thought I could always grab more money when I busted out. This made me a HUGE loosing poker player, and I've adjusted that by tightening my stack play now. I know in the end, I'll probably go back to the ideology of playing the stacks strictly by the way the books tell to play it. For now, I just play it safe and look for high pay off situations with low chip commitment.
Slevin has the same problem (if not worse) that I do, with spewing chips and money. He deposits frequently and constantly waivers back and forth to becoming pro or a recreational player. If he has more self-discipline past the bankroll point, into his stack size, its going to expand to his playing style, making him play more TAGG than LAGG. This is what I truly believe, and my advice was again, only to him directly. I don't think its right for other people.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Just wanted to point out that rarely should you be making moves based on your table image at the microstakes.
I need to remember this.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
This isn't the world series of poker, and players play horrible and reckless". While this is obviously a true statement, I just wanted to point out two quick things. First, the world series of poker is full of absolutely terrible players. And secondly, playing against "horrible and reckless" players is the best thing you can hope for, and sets up ideal situations. I mean if you had money on the line, and wanted to win that money, would you want to play chess against a chess master or your 3 year old brother?
WSOP = horrible players = very true. Finals table there... the skills are tremendous. I should have pointed that out. I apologize for being too broad. I'm going to also comment on the poker theory here to relate to the WSOP.
Ever since I started poker my implied odds have always been my best forte out of anything. From movements, to speech, and to betting patterns, I could pick up what cards my opponent had even before studying poker. It was just that back then, I didn't know how to chain read. Meaning that, I couldn't understand what one mannerism, plus betting pattern, + physical image + chip stack size + whatever else, meant in terms of the player. I just looked at one thing and focused on it.
Now, after studying more and more, I realized Poker is broken into something so very complex. When you get into any table, you always want to play opposite of the table atmosphere and generate high profit payouts. This is one thing books teach you.
Here is something I want to theorize. Please consider it and tell me what you think. In certain tables, depending on the # of fishes there are, the range that people call with, tight players, loose players, calling stations, you can play certain hands with the same probability value as dominant hands. I don't know how to explain it. I'm so excited to tell you what I mean, but its a really complex thing that happens in my head. I understand the table atmosphere almost completely, and I know how to manipulate the betting ranges and when I bet, I generally know what people are holding, and what they're comfortable playing with as soon as post-flop hits.
I play sloppily loose in terms of calling preflop in low stake tables, but its usually when I get 6-1 odds, when the table doesn't raise much, and when I'm deep-stacked. I fold hands that are dominated. A-9 and lower in all early positions. As soon as new players enter and I sense a change in presence, I'll tighten up my game and go strictly back to book playing. So far, all of my sessions on Stars have been positive so I think this is working. I'll let you know after I go 20 more different sessions; who knows, maybe I'm onto something.
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Me bolding the limit holdem remark is basically because I'm unsure whether this is true, but logically wouldn't think so. I have never played limit holdem for any significant amount of time, or studied it. However, I do believe the ranges are wider at limit holdem than at NLHE. And it's because of this your range should be looser at Limit holdem.
My NL hold'em game got strengthened by limit by so much. I have always loss in the end on limit, but the reason why limit taught me how to be better at NL is because of the looseness of other players. When you get to turns and rivers, you have to make impossible decisions. I got beat by a boat of 10s against my trip 9s K kicker for being overly aggressive.
The message I wanted to get to Slevin from that remark is that, Limit Holdem is so much of a loose game. Since everyone is loose, you have to play opposite the table, tight. Its also a game where you can't win Huge pots in a matter of seconds, it takes commitment, time, long-term endurance and will to stay up above water in Limit hold em from my experience.
================================
Overall, I believe I offered advice to Slevin in terms to the phase at where he is now. He's always been looking to be a winning player and to become a professional, but he doesn't have the tools to get there, and he states he lacks self-discipline. I know the advice I give him aren't fundamentally sound, but those were different techniques that helped me, and might be able to make him let go of his schema of how poker should be played, and what poker actually is.
From the very first day, I also made a mental label on you Stacks. The first post I read that was rich of advice was your critique in Slevin's operation thread. Right then, I knew you were one of the elite top players with sound rational advice, that I could learn a lot from. I noticed Slevin had a hard time finding a way to get to the enlightenment of your advice, so I'm trying to make him do things that seem offtrack, or backwards, in order for him to past certain stepping stones to better his game.
Again, I'm totally open to any other schools of thoughts you may have on my comments in this post. I find it that, through our disagreements, I infact agree with everything you said and offered. It is just the level of advice that was given. Yours was higher level, while mine was at a lower level--something I think Slevin needs.
|
, 10
, 6
, 4
, 3
Reply With Quote
winrate
.. Seriously follow that thread, and come join us in #flopturnriver.
It's just the personal attacks being characterised as a prick and all that crap that I don't take very well. I just think lifes too short - and it's completely counterproductive to anyones poker growth! Although I don't retaliate with like for like insults, it's still is a great detractor from actual growth. I mean I could have spent the last half hour reading up on EV which is what I actually intended instead of replying to that tripe.
- I intend to play with 100 buy ins for each limit, I haven't just cropped this number out of thin air though - I have worked it out in great detail - and I think for me that will be the optimum number! I'll let you all know how I came to that number when I return full time to FTR and start posting again (which by current estimates will be about 6-8 weeks from today). 
