Do cards matter? The XX experiment.

[Wet_DreaMer]

The XX Experiment.

What it is: Playing poker without being able to see your cards.
For me this was done at the $1+.10 SnG at UB. I blocked my cards with tape on my computer screen.

Notes: I know this has been done many times before, but recently I thought I would try it for myself. These are just my own experiences, anyone else who has tried it please leave what happened to you.

Reasoning: Too see how important cards really are in a SnG, when compared to other factors like table dynamics, dialogue, stack size and position.
It helps to develop confidence, as your going in to all your decisions completely blind. It also reinforces the notion that draw hands lose value in tournament situations, as you simply cant draw because you dont know when you have hit.

Results: So far Ive played twice.

1. Tried really to place rather than to win, as I didnt know what to expect.
I managed to keep a fairly steady stack size, peaking around 1600 and going down to about 900. I called down preflop very few hands, mainly betting or folding.

In the whole tournament, I went to 2 showdowns.
The first was calling a shortstacks all in, with 93d vs 55. I lost. =P
My second was the hand I went out on. I was the button with 3 left the hand after 4th left and had a stack around 1000
I pushed all in with 84o and got called by AJo. I lost that one too.

Overall I think I was all in preflop around 3 or 4 times, but generally played fairly passive poker.

2. This time I decided to majorly up my aggression and go for first, anything can happen in poker right?

Unfortunately, this didnt work so well. I tried to bluff at big pots, however my cards were never going to speak, which meant I couldnt call all ins.
It didnt take long for me to go down in 8th, was all-in with my microstack with J7s vs QQ

Heh, I guess Ill try again later.

The Challenge: Do try this at home. =)

[AllinLife]

you are wasting your time sir

[Corey]

i didnt want to be the first one to say that .


wasting your time and money.


plz pm me when you are playing again so I can take your chips

[FlyingSaucy]

I've never done this before. I agree that it is a waste of money. The more factors you let yourself consider when playing, the better your play will be. That seems like common sense.

That said, I can see the value in playing this way for a while. It forces you to consider things other than your hole cards. Especially for folks starting out who have a decent handle on the game but often find themselves getting married to hands, for folks who need to work on loose aggression, etc.

It's tempting to try, but to me seems like the losses in the short run of playing like this may not end up being a worthy investment in education.

[a500lbgorilla]

If he's playing the lowest stakes and only paying attention to "what does the other guy have?" it might be an excellent excersise. I'm interested to hear if you think you're reading ability is boosted in some way.

-'rilla

[Sed]

That's what I was thinking... Playing this way forces you to take advantage of any weakness percieved which seems to be an incredibly useful skill as tourneys near the money...

- sed

[Radashack]

this could be a great great experiment , but no offense you are doing it wrong, you shouldn't be callign all ins, you should be playing the players hands.. Always asking what they would make that type of raise with, ect. basically playing reaction poker to your opponents strengths and weakness, betting style ect. I bet it could help a lot of people.

[Sed]

I agree with that Rada. When you are playing this way you need to be the aggressor. Never call. Always be the one forcing the other guy to decide if they want to call and risk all their chips. FEED ON THEIR FEAR.

- sed

[TylerK]

Yeah, I definitely think this is a worthwhile experiment. I've been considering trying the same thing for a while, but I haven't sat down and done it yet. Maybe I will do that soon.

[DaNutsInYoEye]

i didnt want to be the first one to say that .


wasting your time and money.


plz pm me when you are playing again so I can take your chips

Wrong, Wrong, and Wrong.

If it was limit I might possibly agree with you, but in no limit this isn't the case at all. It is a great exercise in playing your stack, your opponent and your position which are often times much more important than the two cards laying in front of you. He invested $1.10 to imrpove his game. How much do you spend on books to improve your game? Think of how much more money we'd all make if those areas of our game were improved.

Have you ever seen some of the great basketball coaches run a practice without using a ball? They do it to reinforce other aspects of the game. This is no different.

I'm surprised at some of the negative comments. You guys should know better than that.

[thenonsequitur]

I once tried this experiment for pre-flop only. Meaning, I would not look at my hole cards until after the flop came. I invested in about 15 $1 tourneys trying this strategy. Even though my win rate was poor during this experiment, it did improve my preflop play quite a bit. I remember that certain situations were much easier to play blind than others. Now my skills are sharper in identifying situations where the pocket cards are not very important. Even though I only covered my cards pre-flop during the experiment, my post-flop recognition of such situations also improved. Gave my internal pattern-recognizer the data set it needed.

P.S. The reason I only covered my hand pre-flop is because I wanted to stay in the tourney long enough to actually be able to try this with quite a few hands. I figured that if I left them covered throughout the hand, I'd probably bust out pretty quickly.

P.P.S. This experiement also directly improved my post-flop play. Since I was seeing flops with weak hands that I normally wouldn't be, I was forced to learn about how to play in such situations.

[soupie]

Actually, a while back i was going to suggest people do this, it is incredibly valuable in that all you have to play on is other peoples actions and can i make them fold. Obviously, you dont want any showdowns. Random hand vs. a hand strong enough to call. Doh.

I used to do this years ago myself in live tourneys. When you get to the point you have to play i would just pretend to look at my cards, then fire in a big bet to steal the blinds. I certainly didnt want the cards talking me out of playing where i knew i had to .

soupie

[Wet_DreaMer]

Wasting my time and money?
Ive played twice so far, and got one third, so Ive wasted two buyins at the $1+.10 level =P
Thats 20 cents. Not exactly br crippling haha
And wasting my time?
Whose quote is it "the only losing session is the one where you learn nothing"?
And besides Im enjoying myself.

this could be a great great experiment , but no offense you are doing it wrong, you shouldn't be callign all ins, you should be playing the players hands.. Always asking what they would make that type of raise with, ect. basically playing reaction poker to your opponents strengths and weakness, betting style ect. I bet it could help a lot of people.

No offense taken at all, its just generally a lot harder in practise (at least so far). I mean I only called one all in in the whole first game. It was against a micro-stack and I had 2 cards I figured would be live against say a big slick or aqua.

What you have suggested is exactly what I am trying to do in the experiment, its just been fairly hard going so far.

Ill try a few more times and report back hehe.

[AvatarKava]

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_maga...es/?a_id=12235

Excellent semi-related article by Daniel Negreanu.

[Xianti]

This is not a waste of time or money at all. I think this is a fantastic exercise.

It's a drill to develop your skill in reading your opponents' hands. It's common knowledge that a big part of no-limit Hold'em is figuring out what your opponent has and representing that you have a stronger hand. If your reading ability is superb, it often doesn't matter what hole cards you have.


I've heard of this exercise before. Thanks for reminding me of it, Wet_Dreamer. I'm going to try this myself.

[Wet_DreaMer]

Thanks avatarkava, reading it now.

I already found the main similarity between the experiments though:

"was basically an excuse for me to go on tilt and feel good about it. It was like “constructive tilt.” Of course, I was absolutely fooling myself."


haha

[TylerK]

I tried it, check out my HH here: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...pic.php?t=5534

[michael1123]

Man, this sounds like it'd be really fun. I doubt it'd improve my game all that much, but I'm definitely going to try this sometime. It should be interesting at the very least.

[CRUSHER]

Interesting strategy. Thanks for sharing it. I believe the idea (or the principal of the idea) is interesting although I am not sure I would implement it in a tournament setting. I like the concept of building confidence and relying on reading your oponent and their cards, however, I would be hesitant to avoid looking at my cards, especially in an all-in situation.

I give you credit for sticking to your experiement all the way through despite the outcome. With that kind of dedication, it became a true experiement. So, now that you completed the lab test, what are your conclusions? Did you gain a confidence you didn't have before? Has it helped you become a better player in other situations?

I thoroughly enjoy the art of finessing strategies until you find the right combination to conquer and destroy. Of course, each game is different, but with a good arsenal, you can reach in and grab the right strategy for the right situation. Beer helps too.

-Crusher

[elanto]

hmm im going to try this to, very interesting


-anto

[ArcticKnight]

I can think of a variation of your approach that might be helpful on several fronts. Why don't you allow yourself to see your hands 3 times a lloop (assuming 10 players). How would this help?

First, it would cause you to focus on gathering information about other players so that you could "save" you 3 views for the most opportune times. So, you now have a "reward" for being extra observant.

Second, it would clearly reinforce the importnace of position (this may not be needed for many veteran players). For example, If UTG fires a 4BB and you are in seat 7, you may say "I'm not even thinking about wasting a look here."

Think about it this way... When you look at your cards in seat 7 you are thinking are "they" good enough to call or raise the UTG 4BB; However, when you cant see your cards you are forced to reflect on what "would" be good enough to call. Your requiremenst can't be clouded by what you have, because you can't see the cards! This would be a great drill to refocus you calling, etc requirements from different positions. It will let you know if you are getting loose, tight or erratic.

PS> And lets be honest, we all cheat and decieve oursleves at times. We may say I'd never call the above with AJs, or 99s in the above scenerio, but when the time comes it may be WTF, I'm in for the 4BB.

Third, information on others is only good if you know when to capitize on it. In most cases you need to know if you have the cards (and u may not need much!) to capitalize on certain situations. Knowledge without application is not much good.


Fourth, you'll quickly figure out which "types" of players you find youself needing your 3 of 10 views on. Think how valuable this could be? What if you found that you always want to take your views against the tight/agressive players. Imagine what this could reveal about your stregnths and weaknesses.

If you did the above drill you would either re-confirm the situations/types of opponents you find the toughest, or you would learn that your presumptions about your weaknesses were wrong.

Excuse the typos. I would welcome any comments on the above..

[KewlKatt]

Joined a $5 Sng this afternoon with my cards covered and here are the results:


http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...pic.php?t=5958

2nd place finish.. was a very fun (funny) experience and a good learning one too. I recommend giving this a try. At very least the Hand History afterwards is worth a good laugh.

KK