Post-SSH Results

[WiredPear]

I'm up 22 BB for the first 100 hands after reading SSH (at the micro-level). Obviously, the sample is too small to make any informative assessment, but it is encouraging.

My weakness has always been playing my strong hands aggressively, so I do feel that the book contributed mightily to this success. THanks Ed.

[chson]

I'm down 50 BB after 3000 hands.

Raising with the intention of protecting a two-pair/backdoor flush draw does not seem profitable at all.

[PseudoPserious]

I read SSH, and last night I lost 19 big bets in just over an hour.

Nevermind that I twice had JJ that lost to a K on the river. Nevermind that it was about 2 hours past my bedtime and I was tired. Nevermind that I had just had a huge fight with an ex-girlfriend and was really, really pissed off. Nevermind that I had just downed more alcohol in an hour than I'd normally drink in a week. Nevermind that I wasn't playing anything like SSH recommended.

Darn SSH, costing me money like that.

PP

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Darn SSH, costing me money like that.

PP

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good product-liability lawsuit to me. With pain and suffering and mental anguish, should be worth a couple mil easy. Obviously you weren't personally responsible for your actions.

[deacsoft]

Just reading the book isn't going to instantly change anything. Re-read the book and be certain that you fully understand the content and can properly apply it. Until that point is reached I see it as unfair to judge the book. Of course you can comment and give thoughts, but I just hope everyone who reads will give it the time it needs to sink in before passing judgement.

[Beavis68]

I have had the double whammy of loosening up too much, and hitting a HORRIBLE steak, the only thing that has kept me alive is I moved way down in limits, so the money mean nada.

I had been losing all of my big posts, but actually doubled in one hand last night with AK from the small blind - ton a callers, and I check-raised the flop when the BB bet it for me.

[djack]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm down 50 BB after 3000 hands.

Raising with the intention of protecting a two-pair/backdoor flush draw does not seem profitable at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, that hand is only going to win some small percentage of the time. However, when it does, you should win a monster.

So on that play alone, there's certainly some variance.

[J.R.]

Sounds like a good product-liability lawsuit to me

Sounds more like a misuse of the product than an actionable design or manufacturing defect.

[PseudoPserious]

I agree. Iron-clad case there. I just need to get the prosecutors from the Bryant and OJ trials to represent 2+2.

PP

[Blarg]

Sometimes I find it's helpful to lower my standards for encouragement and raise them for discouragement. So going good over 100 hands puts me in a helpful good mood, while when I go bad over 100 hands, I realize that's too small a sample size to mean anything.

[Sheriff Fatman]

My results at 3/6 have improved significantly since finishing the first read. I also still think I'm bottling out of some of the turn raises in marginal situations so I'm by no means doing everything as I should be.

Still a small sample but I'm at about 5BB/hr over the 2000 or so hands I've played since reading it. The sessions, on the whole, tend to be either very big winning sessions or fairly big losers. The winners are outnumbering the losers by about 2 to 1 this has included my 3 biggest single winning 3/6 sessions in the space of 2 weeks.

The book opened up how weak-tight my ring game play had become (probably not helped by playing mostly Party NL SnG's in recent months). My thought process through a hand is now much more structured than previously. If I learn nothing else from the book (which would be difficult to do), the fact that I am now so focused on pot size and equity has already put it on a par with Poker Tracker as the best value poker purchase I've ever made.

There is still much to learn and improve on but the book is an absolute gem!

Sheriff

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I took a few weeks off (was playing too much) and read SSH during that time. I'm now up 17.91BB/100 hands since reading SSH, which would be meaningful if I'd played more than 283 hands, which I have not.

I'll keep you posted, but have a sneaking suspicion this win-rate will not hold up.

[razor]

not meaningful numbers either but I'm up 11.64BB/100 in 1,478 hands.

[KingMarc]

I lost $100 after reading SSH, after winning $100 the week before I read SSH (at .5/1). Sooooo..I decided to buy WLLH to get the SSH stuff out of my head /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

600 hands, and the winrate has plummetted from 17.9 to 7.0BB/100. Okay, no more silly posts until I hit 5000 hands in the Post-Millerian Epoch.

[Blarg]

17.9/100 win rate???? Holy mother of.... How the heck many hands was that for?

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Sometimes I find it's helpful to lower my standards for encouragement and raise them for discouragement. So going good over 100 hands puts me in a helpful good mood, while when I go bad over 100 hands, I realize that's too small a sample size to mean anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's totally absurd. An internet multitabler plays 100 hands in less than 30 minutes.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

[ QUOTE ]
17.9/100 win rate???? Holy mother of.... How the heck many hands was that for?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a couple hundred. It was meant as a joke, apparently not a very funny one.

[jdl22]

I liked it.

As for my results, I don't like them so far -100 bb/100 hands.
Hand #1 post in the cutoff, get 2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif UTG raises, UTG+1 3 bets folded to me and I fold.
Hand #2 forthcoming.

[SlantNGo]

I think the SSH material is very tough to understand. Since it is designed to CRUSH, not beat the loose games, if I understand correctly, it focuses on maximizing your expectation by aggressive play. However, until you really understand the material and understand when it is correct to raise to protect your hand, what type of draws and when to raise on, you become a "chip-spewing LAG". I'm currently there so I've stopped playing for awhile... I can't even get the hand quizzes right after one read through the material, so I think I need to read at least the flop section again.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Okay, just 1K hands into the Post-Millerian Epoch and I'm beginning to realize that this stuff is pretty complex. A single reading of SSH won't do it. Moving from what I now realize was weak-tight, to a truly TAG style of play, but while keeping track of the mathematics is not easy.

The swings for me have been bigger, but the biggest difference in outcomes for me has been in not folding winners (after 1K hands, I'm still averaging 10 BB/100, but this is short-term and will certainly decrease). I would expect though to have my WR improve to 3+ BB/100 playing this way. But then, I've been running well over the last 14K hands at 2/4, winning over 4.5 BB/100, so 3+ would be a decrease in earnings. Hey, I want my money back. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[cartoonsoldier]

Doing pretty good after reading WLLH again and then SSH and I haven't finished the whole book yet.

.05/.10 on Stars, I don't have the exact stats as I dont have PT, but I am up about 40$ after reading SSH, non-multitabling.

[Wahoo91]

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like a good product-liability lawsuit to me

Sounds more like a misuse of the product than an actionable design or manufacturing defect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clear user error.

[Joe Tall]

Raising with the intention of protecting a two-pair/backdoor flush draw does not seem profitable at all.

This has to be the most misunderstood topic in the book and will continue to be for quite some time.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[flair1239]

I was alarmed by some of the posts too, regarding protecting your hand.

However after actually reading the book, I have different understanding. I think people are combining the raising on the turn to protect your hand (which you think is the probable best at that time), with the part about raising on the turn to eliminate people in a big pot and "to buy outs". Many people seem to be ignoring the "big pot" caveat.

Ed is quite thorough about specifically when these plays should be applied. I think after some more time passes and people reread the book and get more playing experience, these things will clear themselves up.

As a side note many of the ideas in Ed's book are covered in the "loose" game section of HeFAP.