SSH - p89 - Question

[TripKings]

Ed, David, Mason, or anyone who can help me understand:

From SSH p89: "For loose games we recommend that you play the same hands from middle position that you would from early position."

It seems to me that the opposite would be true(even without actually *adding* hands). Is this printed/written correctly? If so, I don't understand it. Please explain. Thank you.

-Tripkings

[Ed Miller]

It seems to me that the opposite would be true(even without actually *adding* hands).

It is written as intended. I'm afraid I don't even know what the "opposite" of that statement is.

[PokerNoob]

Isn't it rather self-evident that if a hand is good enough to play in EP, it should be good enough to play in MP? (I haven't read the book, so I don't know the context this sentence was lifted from though). The "opposite" would be to loosen up and play MP position hands in EP in a loose game.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that the opposite would be true(even without actually *adding* hands).

It is written as intended. I'm afraid I don't even know what the "opposite" of that statement is.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think by opposite he means to say that it might be suggested that, in a loose game, you should play hands in EP that you would've played in MP after a couple of limpers in an ordinary game.

I just think the sentence is so intuitive that it almost sounds like it should be something else. But what's intuitive for some is abstract for others.

I want my damn copy. I've been sitting in my room all day so I can see when the FedEx guy comes. I expect you to hand deliver it to me, if I don't get it in the next 30 seconds. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TripKings]

Ok, in a tight(er) game I should then tend to play the same hands in early position that I would from middle position?

When *don't* I play the same hands from middle position that I would from early position?

I figured it indeed was written as intended, but my thinking is WAY off..... or the wording is throwing me. Sorry, I don't know why this is giving me trouble.

-TripKings

[Ed Miller]

Oh sorry. I see how you are confused now. The intended point is that we do not recommend that you ADD hands in middle position in a loose game. The set of hands we recommend that you play in early position is the same as the set in middle position in the loose game. (Whereas, you do add hands in middle position over those you'd play in early position in a tight game.)

Before anyone who hasn't read the book jumps to conclusions about this statement, please read it in the entire context of the preflop section. I think it will make more sense (and we explain this point specifically in the "A few notes" section).

Remember, TripKings, the whole section this comes from is intended only as a first approximation... as a starting point... as a rough guideline. Those charts were made with simplicity and ease of use as a priority almost as high as accuracy. We figured that saying "same hands as early position" under middle position would make it easy to remember. And it's reasonably close to correct for the loose game we outlined.

Once you improve your preflop instincts, you shouldn't be using those charts anymore.

[TripKings]

So it could read: *In loose games we recommend that you play the same hands from early position that you would play in middle position in a tighter game... without adding hands to middle position.* ???

And this is supported by the follow-up statements in that section. Has the intended point sunk into my head yet?

-TripKings

[Ed Miller]

Those charts recommend you play a certain set of hands in middle position in a tight game, early position in a loose game, and middle position in a loose game. We don't alter the set in any of those three spots.

The actual "correct" strategy probably involves switching some hands in and out in some of those spots. But as a "first approximation" playing the same set of hands in all three places is ok. We made them the same so there would be only one set of hands to remember, not three.

[TripKings]

Ding! Alright, I've got it now. I was letting the sentence stand on its own without referring back to the charts that these notes about recommendations were intended to help explain.... damned state school education.... I think I'm starting to understand why smart guys get so frustrated when they have to interact with guys like me. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Thanks Ed.

-TripKings