Effin_River1980
03-26-2005, 03:05 AM
Hi all, as you probably guessed from my previous post, I am a newbie here, but very excited in learning some insightful information. A little about myself: I am relatively new at Hold'em, having clocked in a little more than sixty hours (althought much more online play), and having only played for one year. Yet as a recent college grad, I have taken a students path in undertaking this journey, reading about five books now, plenty of conversation with others.
Currently I am reading John Feeney's "Inside the Poker Mind" (highly recommended), which has caused me to reassess my current strategic thinking.
My current concern involves chasers. Lately I have been consistently been outdrawn when I feel as though I had the best hand. Mike Caro tells us to embrace these chasers, for in the long run they will lose and I will win (a solemn consolation when losing). Then I read a posting by the late Andy Morton on rec.gambling about "schooling" and implicit collusion, and the idea that an increasing number of chasers will actually reduce profit after a certain number (e.g. one person chasing a straight, one a flush, and a third chasing his pair of fours, all the while you hold AK with top pair). His theorem validated what so many of us have felt at low limit ($3/6 for me) poker, and yet I am trying to figure out the best way to combat this kind of table. A relatively passive table, where one can limp in or call on one raise preflop; one where there are usually three to the river or more, with chasers all the way.
It has been suggested that one should reduce the number of unsuited hands, as this will increase stronger draws. Also, someone told me to play more suited connectors in other-than-late positions. This makes sense, but I am still frusterated at my lack of profit (I am a break-even player at the moment) in the face of such bad players. I realize that having played such a small amount of time, other aspects of my game are undeveloped which would increase my hourly earnings, but I am in need of more experienced advice. I hope ya'll can help.
Sorry for the long post
Thanks,
E_R
Currently I am reading John Feeney's "Inside the Poker Mind" (highly recommended), which has caused me to reassess my current strategic thinking.
My current concern involves chasers. Lately I have been consistently been outdrawn when I feel as though I had the best hand. Mike Caro tells us to embrace these chasers, for in the long run they will lose and I will win (a solemn consolation when losing). Then I read a posting by the late Andy Morton on rec.gambling about "schooling" and implicit collusion, and the idea that an increasing number of chasers will actually reduce profit after a certain number (e.g. one person chasing a straight, one a flush, and a third chasing his pair of fours, all the while you hold AK with top pair). His theorem validated what so many of us have felt at low limit ($3/6 for me) poker, and yet I am trying to figure out the best way to combat this kind of table. A relatively passive table, where one can limp in or call on one raise preflop; one where there are usually three to the river or more, with chasers all the way.
It has been suggested that one should reduce the number of unsuited hands, as this will increase stronger draws. Also, someone told me to play more suited connectors in other-than-late positions. This makes sense, but I am still frusterated at my lack of profit (I am a break-even player at the moment) in the face of such bad players. I realize that having played such a small amount of time, other aspects of my game are undeveloped which would increase my hourly earnings, but I am in need of more experienced advice. I hope ya'll can help.
Sorry for the long post
Thanks,
E_R