The tyranny of the majority (long)

[AtticusFinch]

<soapbox>
Recently, as I've been working through my move up to the $109s, I've been thinking a lot about the kinds of adjustments I need to make to be successful at higher levels, and I must confess that I'm a bit concerned about certain patterns I'm seeing in our discussions.

First, though, let me be clear. I can say without hesitation that I owe all the success I've had thus far to this site, and am proud to be part of this community.

What troubles me is some people's tendency to treat certain plays as Holy Gospel, without an eye to the larger context.

Let me give you an example. Lately I've been kicking around the idea of working on a structured approach to analyzing table image and if/how it should come into play in pushing decisions. To this end, I posted a thread wherein I asked if I should make a pretty standard push after having taken three very bad beats in a row. (I had jt and about 8 bb, if memory serves). Normally this is an easy push, but here my opponents might well read me as being on tilt and loosen up their calling range.

The result of my post was that two people flamed me for posting a "bad beat" thread (obviously they missed the point completely), one claimed that I was obviously on tilt and couldn't handle bad beats, and those who seemed to get what I was asking posted one-sentence answers. So much for the lively debate I was hoping for.

I'm always irritated by flames (whether directed at me or not), but that's not the real point, here. I'll go out on a limb and say that this board is probably *the* cutting edge of SNG tactics, but that doesn't mean we all don't have more to learn.

With pushing decisions in particular, we usually just look at the numbers. Position, blinds, stacks, etc. Every now and then a read is tossed in as well. Rarely does anyone ask or consider if the player has pushed the last 10 hands in a row, yet no one will deny that this must have an effect on calling ranges, which can in turn affect the EV of the play.

I think there are two sources for this issue, and both are actually pretty well justified in discounting fuzzier considerations like image.

1) Lower-limit players

When playing at lower limits, you're probably right just to stick with the formula. No one is paying attention to how you play, anyway. Don't cast pearls before swine.

2) Multi-tablers

When 8-tabling, you usually don't have time to make a deep analysis of your table image, or of your opponents' playing patterns.


No, I'm not advocating splitting up the board. Still, if we're all to grow, I think we need to expand our thinking, and not let our strategy get so entrenched that we stop ourselves from refining it. Be more open to new ideas, even (especially?) from newbies, and even if they seem "stupid" at first blush. Instead of flaming the new player, try to draw them into a discussion about why their play is not the best (Scuba Chuck, for example, has made several admirable efforts to this end -- as have others.) At worst, you'll help a new player. At best, you'll solidify your own understanding, or possibly even learn a new angle for thinking about an issue that helps expand your arsenal. Flaming accomplishes nothing.

I'd like to see more threads like Gigabet's hand history, where we can talk about the non-"standard" plays that the truly great players frequently make, and the thinking behind them.

But you shouldn't have to be Gigabet to draw people into discussions about these ideas. I'd like to think even a donk like me could get one going.

Some ideas I'd like to see discussed more (incomplete and in no particular order):

- Risk v/ reward for deceptive plays like giving free cards with less than a monster

- The merits of playing (somewhat) more aggressively early

- Risk v. reward for resteals

- How to improve your ability to read your opponents

- anything else that goes beyond just your hand, the blinds, and the stacks (but by all means lets keep the technical discussions going, too)
</soapbox>

Thanks again to all those 2+2ers who have taught me so much so quickly.

[axeshigh]

I think the problem is that you are trying to discuss high-level concepts. The people who are qualified to discuss them (i.e. those who think when playing) are not interested in educating their opponents. I remember when I started playing the 11s to the 33s, I found many helpful posts each day about things that were kinda new to me. Now that I have moved up to the 55s and beyond, I never see anything useful, just the same drivel repeated over and over. I know who the good 'high stakes' players are and I don't see them giving quality advice to their direct opponents. I remember making tons of threads about how to adjust from the 33s to the 55s and the 109s and getting no responses from the good players. I'm also stunned at the amount of bad advice that is given in certain threads about fairly basic concepts. This forum is good for learning but after a certain level you need to figure things for yourself. It seems like anyone who knows what they talk about are only posting OOT. I may be wrong, but this is how I see it. Anyway, the fact that there are 120 views and no (other) replies speaks for itself.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]

- Risk v/ reward for deceptive plays like giving free cards with less than a monster

- The merits of playing (somewhat) more aggressively early

- Risk v. reward for resteals

- How to improve your ability to read your opponents

- anything else that goes beyond just your hand, the blinds, and the stacks (but by all means lets keep the technical discussions going, too)
</soapbox>

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to add "controlling the size of the pot" here. It is a problem for me. When in a multiway pot on the flop and I bet the pot, 2/3 the pot or something like that I often find that when on the turn I have rendered my stack powerless because more players than I expected called on the flop so the pot is too big for anyone to get away from.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the problem is that you are trying to discuss high-level concepts. The people who are qualified to discuss them (i.e. those who think when playing) are not interested in educating their opponents. I remember when I started playing the 11s to the 33s, I found many helpful posts each day about things that were kinda new to me. Now that I have moved up to the 55s and beyond, I never see anything useful, just the same drivel repeated over and over. I know who the good 'high stakes' players are and I don't see them giving quality advice to their direct opponents. I remember making tons of threads about how to adjust from the 33s to the 55s and the 109s and getting no responses from the good players. I'm also stunned at the amount of bad advice that is given in certain threads about fairly basic concepts. This forum is good for learning but after a certain level you need to figure things for yourself. It seems like anyone who knows what they talk about are only posting OOT. I may be wrong, but this is how I see it. Anyway, the fact that there are 120 views and no (other) replies speaks for itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sadly, I agree with pretty much everyone you said... The point you make about top players not wanting to educate their opponents is true in this forum more so than any other strategy forum on 2+2 from my observation. I've already reached the point where most of my learning now occurs either on my own, or talking 1-on-1 with 2+2ers on AIM etc.

[Oluwafemi]

good post Atticus. you've touched on alot of ideas that i've had in my head, of which, i quite couldn't put into words.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Sadly, I agree with pretty much everyone you said... The point you make about top players not wanting to educate their opponents is true in this forum more so than any other strategy forum on 2+2 from my observation. I've already reached the point where most of my learning now occurs either on my own, or talking 1-on-1 with 2+2ers on AIM etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

And that's why I think you typically get the following types of replies from posters whom I think get it.

1) Single sentence response (means someone's close)
2) Bread crumbs (never know where this may lead - but might identify a stretegy concept)
3) Long winded responses (means no one is near any real strategy)

Anyway, to Atticus:
I'd like to discuss resteal opportunities more.
Improving table/opponent reads.

Another thing that might be interesting is discussing one of the Mini-step 5s that was posted earlier. In that post, there was a player who went by PokerIdiot (not the OP), who in the early part of the game played super laggy. Anyway, his style I thought was very effective early, but ineffective late. Is it not possible to adapt to that early style, and switch to my normal style late? Perhaps what I'm saying doesn't make much sense in the $33s, but I would think in the higher levels, like $109s or $215s+, this might be a very +CEV strategy. Wish I could find that post.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]


I'd like to add "controlling the size of the pot" here. It is a problem for me. When in a multiway pot on the flop and I bet the pot, 2/3 the pot or something like that I often find that when on the turn I have rendered my stack powerless because more players than I expected called on the flop so the pot is too big for anyone to get away from.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's a damn good one. I need a lot of work on that concept myself.

[pergesu]

Make sure Adanthar sees this so he can explain it all to the rest of us

[jon462]

Plato was right, democracy sucks..

[Degen]

i'd def vote yes on a SS STT forum and a Mid-High STT forum

cutoff probably being the 55's

[Ogre]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd def vote yes on a SS STT forum and a Mid-High STT forum

cutoff probably being the 55's

[/ QUOTE ]

They say there wont be enough posts to keep the high limit board going and the low limit players want advice from the more experienced players. I still want it to be split up though.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

They say there wont be enough posts to keep the high limit board going and the low limit players want advice from the more experienced players. I still want it to be split up though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every time I've kicked around the notion in my head I've decided it wouldn't be a good idea. Perhaps it's the years I've spent in Martial Arts classes, where all levels are always in the same group, but I think both the higher and lower level players benefit from the interaction. Confucius say "He who teaches learns twice."

Besides, there are plenty of excellent players who play at lower limits because they don't (yet) have the roll to move up, or just don't want to. Where would they go?

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
Where would they go?

[/ QUOTE ]

They'd go low...its SMALL STAKES not inexperienced.


I find it hard to wade through all of the crap here and don't read as many threads as I probably should because of this...and i thereby am missing a ton of good threads/posts i'm sure.

i think there DEFINATELY would be enuff people posting in mid/hi just because of this fact, i'm sure i'm not the only one.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Where would they go?

[/ QUOTE ]

They'd go low...its SMALL STAKES not inexperienced.


I find it hard to wade through all of the crap here and don't read as many threads as I probably should because of this...and i thereby am missing a ton of good threads/posts i'm sure.

i think there DEFINATELY would be enuff people posting in mid/hi just because of this fact, i'm sure i'm not the only one.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point. And in other sections of this site, the higher limit posters still post advice in the smaller stakes forums.

[vinyard]

[ QUOTE ]
i think there DEFINATELY would be enuff people posting in mid/hi just because of this fact, i'm sure i'm not the only one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there is some value in breaking the board into 800 chip and 1000 chip games. That being said, doing that is only necessary because of 2+2's moderation policy being so lenient with posters. If they made three or four additional moderators and let them remove OT posts and ban posters this would all likely be a non-issue.

[Degen]

ok i put this as a new thread, sorry atticus...didn't know if this would be a hi-jack or not and hopefully everybody will weigh in...i also PM'd citanul, lets try and get this done if anybody else is interested...

[ QUOTE ]
good post Atticus. you've touched on alot of ideas that i've had in my head, of which, i quite couldn't put into words.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Jman28]

Good post atticus. I agree with a lot of what you said.

One thing that I think you misunderstand: When you are looking at a push/fold situation, it is pretty much a pure math play. The fact that you look like you are on tilt and/or have pushed the last 4 hands DOES matter. You just adjust the calling ranges of your opponents and re-evaluate. There really shouldn't be too much need for discussing it further, except for maybe talking about how opponents adjust their calling ranges depending on prior hands.

But yeah, other than that, feel free to start any concept/non-standard posts that you wish to discuss. If you feel you aren't getting the responses you wanted, PM me and I'll respond in the thread with some thought behind it.

[Uppercut]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there is some value in breaking the board into 800 chip and 1000 chip games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokerstars has 1,500 chip games.

[david050173]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'd def vote yes on a SS STT forum and a Mid-High STT forum

cutoff probably being the 55's

[/ QUOTE ]

They say there wont be enough posts to keep the high limit board going and the low limit players want advice from the more experienced players. I still want it to be split up though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Strategy and other. If you get all the bankroll, bad runs, social stuff, there will not be too many posts. Yes I know everyone will still post thier bad beat stories in the strategy forum..

[fnord_too]

It's late, and I don't have time or alertness for a good response here, so I'll just ramble a little instead.

Truly novel ideas rarely get much discussion unless they are posted by people who have an army of sychophants. That's one of the reasons these posters are so valuable, because their name alone can get a good discussion going.

After the first couple of levels of a sit and go you are playing short stack no limit, which does not allow the creativity of deep stack NL. Even in the first couple of round you are only playing medium stack NL. Those levels are the most interesting to me, after that the game quickly degrades into exploiting big preflop weaknesses and not making pre-flop mistakes. For the play of medium to deep stack NL, read the NL forums. They get some very good discussion there. Even though a lot of players don't post 'interesting' hands (to them) because they don't want to give too much away, 'interesting' is a very relative term. Honestly, there is not a whole lot that is interesting in STT's. Your decision space is just too small, and the consequences of mis steps just too great.

The exception to the above is psychology. I would highly recomend reading Tversky and Khaneman's work. I'd type more but I really need to sleep. (It'll be interesting to read this tomorrow when I am reasonbly coherant.)

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
That being said, doing that is only necessary because of 2+2's moderation policy being so lenient with posters. If they made three or four additional moderators and let them remove OT posts and ban posters this would all likely be a non-issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last thing I want to see is banning OT posts. Come on, have a sense of humor, folks. A little OT chat makes this place feel more like a community.

That being said, and perhaps paradoxically, I'd be all for banning people who act like schmucks. I think a no-[censored] policy would be a good thing. I'd be sorry to see Adanthar go, but you want to make an omelet, you have to crack some eggs. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
Good post atticus. I agree with a lot of what you said.

One thing that I think you misunderstand: When you are looking at a push/fold situation, it is pretty much a pure math play. The fact that you look like you are on tilt and/or have pushed the last 4 hands DOES matter. You just adjust the calling ranges of your opponents and re-evaluate.

[/ QUOTE ]


Of course. I even alluded to that in my OP. I was trying to find a quantitative way of analyzing table image. Something along the lines of measuring calls/push (over a LONG period of time.)

It's somewhat ironic that the so-called fuzzy discussions that some folks pooh-pooh here can lead to further technical knowledge and techniques, and that's part of my point. We can refine the math by delving more into these issues. Probability theory is all about information. If you ignore information at your disposal, such as table image, your calculated expected values will be incorrect.

[ QUOTE ]

There really shouldn't be too much need for discussing it further, except for maybe talking about how opponents adjust their calling ranges depending on prior hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think that's a short discussion, I beg to differ. That's a sticky wicket if I ever saw one. Exactly when should you decide you're pushing "too much" and cool it for a while? Right now, I do this entirely based on "feel."

In any case this particular issue was only an example of a larger trend I see here.

[ QUOTE ]

But yeah, other than that, feel free to start any concept/non-standard posts that you wish to discuss. If you feel you aren't getting the responses you wanted, PM me and I'll respond in the thread with some thought behind it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alrighty then. Now I just have to think of something intelligent to say. See you in about a month /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Holla.

If people don't want to educate that's their decision. There are still a number of high level players who contribute poker content, a couple that come to mind immediately are curtains, adanthar and chrisv and they're far from the only ones. I also think there's much to be learned from some who play at lower levels.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
If people don't want to educate that's their decision. There are still a number of high level players who contribute poker content, a couple that come to mind immediately are curtains, adanthar and chrisv and they're far from the only ones. I also think there's much to be learned from some who play at lower levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Adanthar is so smelly. Sure, he's better at Poker than I am, but when it comes to personal hygeine, I pwn him.

Sigh, I still remember the days when I would tell Adanthar over a couple of beers that he ought to quit playing limit and give NL SNGs a try. Now he's a NL master of the universe. Blew past me like a Bostonian through Kansas on his way to San Francisco.

I'll catch up yet, though, dammit.

[Nicholasp27]

very nice post and i completely agree

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing that might be interesting is discussing one of the Mini-step 5s that was posted earlier. In that post, there was a player who went by PokerIdiot (not the OP), who in the early part of the game played super laggy. Anyway, his style I thought was very effective early, but ineffective late. Is it not possible to adapt to that early style, and switch to my normal style late? Perhaps what I'm saying doesn't make much sense in the $33s, but I would think in the higher levels, like $109s or $215s+, this might be a very +CEV strategy. Wish I could find that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

PokerIdiot HH (Another thing that might be interesting is discussing one of the Mini-step 5s that was posted earlier. In that post, there was a player who went by PokerIdiot (not the OP), who in the early part of the game played super laggy. Anyway, his style I thought was very effective early, but ineffective late. Is it not possible to adapt to that early style, and switch to my normal style late? Perhaps what I'm saying doesn't make much sense in the $33s, but I would think in the higher levels, like $109s or $215s+, this might be a very +CEV strategy. Wish I could find that post. )

[Nicholasp27]

link says 'forbidden'

[ QUOTE ]
If you think that's a short discussion, I beg to differ. That's a sticky wicket if I ever saw one. Exactly when should you decide you're pushing "too much" and cool it for a while? Right now, I do this entirely based on "feel."

[/ QUOTE ]<disclaimer>My experience is entirely in the low limit games</disclaimer>, but I think you are right to do his by feel rather than by formula. Individuals' perceptions of what "too much" is is going to vary greatly, even at the same table. If the SB folds to you in the BB when you hold 62, this will probably stick in your mind more than if he folded to your Qx. And, will stick in a whole different manner than if he folded to your AK.

If someone pushes 3-4 times against me and every time the decision is easy, it's probably not going to effect me the same way it would if the decisions had been difficult. And, even if you know what cards the other person has, you're probably not going to have the same opinion about whether the decisions were easy as the other guy does (remember, this is low stakes).

[pooh74]

I havent read any replies yet, but good post atticus.

Let me just say that, as I see it, if I am not playing continuously and playing sets, If I have only one going, I have an incredibly high ROI on that one table. Being able to concentrate on how you are perceived and really putting yourself in your opponents' heads is huge.

I think this forum does do a good job actually of acknowledging this however.

A great example is pushing 2- 3hands in a row and then folding A9 or something at high blinds...I mean, geez, If A9 were the first of those hands it would be an insta push. Im not giving any details, but you get the picture...

[jedinite]

I just finished Harrington v2 this weekend.

Harrington v2 has a section where he talks a little about table image regarding recently played hands and how that should affect your decisions. He writes more about tightening up your limp/open standards and/or continuation bet standards if you've won several hands recently (especially had continuation bets take down several pots recently).

I would have liked to see him expand on that further, but I immediately had the though on reading that section back to the referenced starting thread you'd posted last week, Atticus.

I think the way Harrinton puts it is perfect - if you've won several pots in recent memory without showing down a hand, especially with the pushbot strategy, anyone paying attention is going to significantly losen their calling standards.

Its also obvious that the more widespread the publication of the pushbot strategy comes (and the more widespread the adoption becomes, as the strategy will spread beyond 2+2 just by a few observant players who pick it up from exposure) the less effective its going to become - people drastically lessening calling standards from the blinds, turning bubble play into a crapshoot....

I intended to run a lot of ICM numbers with really wide calling standards to build this scenario and try to come up with a model cutoff for that fourth push (or whatever number) - but haven't done the groundwork yet.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
link says 'forbidden'

[/ QUOTE ]

Trying again...

linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=3097548&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&fpart=all&vc=1)

[Nicholasp27]

works!

thanks

[ewing55]

I understand and agree with what you are saying, but I also believe the opposite it true. I have pushed A9 from SB, JJ from the button, AK from CO and then AA from UTG, all in a row 5 handed. I knew, and was hoping for a call, but everyone insta-mucked. Sometimes I think everyone starts thinking "He's gone completely nuts, and I'm staying out of his way!" They will even start folded their SB to my BB.

Of course maybe everyone got horrible cards on all of those hands, but I've seen it over and over again. I've started paying attention to my feelings where there is a bully/maniac at the table and I find that sometimes I get into this "if I don't have AA I might as well fold" mode.

I agree that table image is critical, but it is not always acted upon as we would think as logical.

I have recently changed my game and am now starting into the later rounds usually with more chips and am trying to learn more about being a bully/maniac. This discussion is very helpful.

-------------Jeff

[Supersetoy]

[ QUOTE ]
Its also obvious that the more widespread the publication of the pushbot strategy comes (and the more widespread the adoption becomes, as the strategy will spread beyond 2+2 just by a few observant players who pick it up from exposure) the less effective its going to become - people drastically lessening calling standards from the blinds, turning bubble play into a crapshoot....

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my thoughts. (Referring to the crapshoot). I've already seen this happen both on Party and Stars (from the 30s all the way up to the 200s).

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its also obvious that the more widespread the publication of the pushbot strategy comes (and the more widespread the adoption becomes, as the strategy will spread beyond 2+2 just by a few observant players who pick it up from exposure) the less effective its going to become - people drastically lessening calling standards from the blinds, turning bubble play into a crapshoot....

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my thoughts. (Referring to the crapshoot). I've already seen this happen both on Party and Stars (from the 30s all the way up to the 200s).

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, although it depends on the time of day. I think it's a regional thing at the moment, but only a matter of time before it spreads.

I think that this development makes it even more important to try and find another way to gain an advantage at the bubble. I think developing "feel" (or its technical equivalence) for push frequency and table image is one potential way to do that.

[TheCodeDog]

800 vs 1000 chip is awfully Party specific.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that I think you misunderstand: When you are looking at a push/fold situation, it is pretty much a pure math play. The fact that you look like you are on tilt and/or have pushed the last 4 hands DOES matter. You just adjust the calling ranges of your opponents and re-evaluate. There really shouldn't be too much need for discussing it further, except for maybe talking about how opponents adjust their calling ranges depending on prior hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

this thread has been around a while for me not to even bother reading it. ive been really lazy lately but now im in a required study hall at the library, so long posts are goot. anyways, jman hits on the point i think everyone should notice.

basically, it doesnt matter how many hands you have pushed in the past, as long as you can predict the calling ranges of your opponents and adjust your pushes to that. so what if his range includes pure trash hands. so what if u get called by 58s cuz hes made u been stealing the blinds. it IS pure math. nothing more. learn to put your opponents on calling ranges. its much more important that learning when to call pushes. holla

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
learn to put your opponents on calling ranges. its much more important that learning when to call pushes. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

We're going in circles. I'll make it really simple:

1) Table image affects calling ranges.
2) So in order to assess calling ranges accurately, you must find a way to analyze table image.
3) Therefore, ignore table image at your peril.

You cannot make an accurate probabilistic analysis without using ALL relevant information at your disposal (Cf. the Monty Hall Dilemma (http://www.cut-the-knot.org/hall.shtml).)

What I'm trying to get at is we need some way to measure or estimate how table image affects calling ranges. It may be a fuzzy concept, but no one can deny that it has an effect, and a significant one at that.

After that, you're right, it's all math.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
3) Therefore, ignore table image at your peril.

[/ QUOTE ]

i will. sure do hope they call with 10 high. just automatically assume they call with a whole bunch of crap. cant go too wrong that way. holla

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

i will. sure do hope they call with 10 high.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't. Do you see why?

[ QUOTE ]

just automatically assume they call with a whole bunch of crap. cant go too wrong that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, I beg to differ. Sounds like a one-way trip to 4th place to me.

[The Yugoslavian]

Raptor is talking about unexploitable play I believe.

So it really doesn't matter what your opponent does.

That's why it's unexploitable.

However, sure, if you can get good reads as well then you're just going to profit even more.

Yugoslav

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i will. sure do hope they call with 10 high.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't. Do you see why?

[ QUOTE ]

just automatically assume they call with a whole bunch of crap. cant go too wrong that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, I beg to differ. Sounds like a one-way trip to 4th place to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

sigh. must i break this down further.. ok look, if the people are calling shoves with stuff like T7.. then OBVIOUSLY you are not going to be shoving to merely steal his blinds. you will obviously need to adjust. im pretty sure i could fall in love with someone that calls a shove in that spot with 10 high. do YOU see why?

as far as assuming they call with a whole bunch of crap, you seem to forget its STILL Correct to also in turn SHOVE with a whole bunch of crap. hence the 'unexploitable' strategy yugo refers to. hope that helps. holla

[Nicholasp27]

if u assume they will be loose/maniacs when they are playing tight, then u are passing up a WHOLE bunch of +ev

it may be worth it to maximize $/hour via multitabling, but to maximize ev and roi, u'd want to analyze your opps and not just assume they are maniacs

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
if u assume they will be loose/maniacs when they are playing tight, then u are passing up a WHOLE bunch of +ev

it may be worth it to maximize $/hour via multitabling, but to maximize ev and roi, u'd want to analyze your opps and not just assume they are maniacs

[/ QUOTE ]

god. ok. everything im saying is being blown way out of proportion. basically what im trying to say is in that spot you shouldnt be shoving 23. you should be shoving EVERY hand thats better than 45% against any 2. every hand. and then some more. however, dont get pissed when they call with Q3. you know you made the right play. rawr.

as far as assuming they are maniacs.. you must not have played many 215s.. holla

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i will. sure do hope they call with 10 high.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't. Do you see why?

[ QUOTE ]

just automatically assume they call with a whole bunch of crap. cant go too wrong that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, I beg to differ. Sounds like a one-way trip to 4th place to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

sigh. must i break this down further.. ok look, if the people are calling shoves with stuff like T7.. then OBVIOUSLY you are not going to be shoving to merely steal his blinds. you will obviously need to adjust. im pretty sure i could fall in love with someone that calls a shove in that spot with 10 high. do YOU see why?

as far as assuming they call with a whole bunch of crap, you seem to forget its STILL Correct to also in turn SHOVE with a whole bunch of crap. hence the 'unexploitable' strategy yugo refers to. hope that helps. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. Understood. I'm saying this is a lousy situation to be in, not that it isn't correct to shove. And sure, I can see how, in this situation, you'd like someone to call with trash. But I'd much rather be at a table where folks only call with aa-qq, AK.

I suspect we're actually on the same page, here. Holla.