Phil Ivey hand history

[paulish]

Not sure if this is the section spot for this post

I used to play chess when I was younger. All the books and pro's recomended that you play the masters games over and over again on a home board. This excercise helped my game quite alot (and I crawled my way from 1200ELO into 1600ELO).

There are books that focus strictly on the play of hands in NL-holde'm. But I often find that the hands discussed in the poker literature are often taken out of context, with the number one criteria being; spectaculal and unique.

Thus I have a very hard time using the tips from the books too my own game. This is why I'm wondering if the old chess-tecnique can be aplied to poker...?

I'd love to get my hold of Phil Ivey's (or another pro) hand-history outprint from an internet tourney. This way I could get better feel of his play. Anybody know where one can get this?

[fnord_too]

One reason this may not translate as well as one may suppose is that chess is a game of complete information, whereas poker is not. Since so much (especially in NL) is dependant on the opponent, you really would not have insight into the read of the opponent. For example, what are you going to learn from seeing Ivey fold middle set on the river for a big bet on a no straight/flush board vice value betting second pair on the river against another opponent (both of these are very odd plays indeed).

I think with so many variables outside the cards, looking at un-anotated hand histories may not be too helpful for NL.

For limit, I think it would be better, but you would still miss all the subtleties that rely on external information (e.g. "why would he three bet an UTG raiser from middle position with A7o?). I think the bulk of the play would be pretty straight forward for limit, but you would miss some of the reasoning behind the non standard play, and it is that reasoning that you really want insight too.

As I recall, those chess games are pretty well anotated, too. If you could get the pro to annotate the hand, I think it would be invaluable, but only the person who played the hand can accurately tell you why they did what they did (unlike chess where one can figure out why someone did what they did absolutely through careful board analysis.)

[illunious]

Not "name" pros, but this (http://teamfu.freeshell.org/visitor_histories.html) site has hand histories from internet pros and a hand history replayer.

[Reef]

it probably wouldn't do you any good unless you had Phil's or some other experts opinion/commentary

[sexypanda]

You should check out Negreanu's articles on FullContactPoker.com he often times goes through tournament hands and his thought process throughout. His articles have given me some great insight on nl play.

[deaders]

[ QUOTE ]
You should check out Negreanu's articles on FullContactPoker.com he often times goes through tournament hands and his thought process throughout. His articles have given me some great insight on nl play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seconding this. His articles are quite interesting to read, although from a purely learning standpoint it might not be the best to try to emulate some of his plays, but it does give you insight into his thought processes during a hand.

[BSXX]

[ QUOTE ]
One reason this may not translate as well as one may suppose is that chess is a game of complete information, whereas poker is not. Since so much (especially in NL) is dependant on the opponent, you really would not have insight into the read of the opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep.