PDA

View Full Version : Did I Just Have A Limit Hold'em Epiphany?


PokerProdigy
09-21-2005, 12:30 AM
Alright, so first I am going to give you guys a little bit of background about me, so you'll be better able to give me some feedback. I am 20 years old and I have been playing poker and reading a lot of poker since I was 18. I have mostly just tried to stay focused on learning the game of holdem (both limit and no-limit) but I also read up a bit about other games just to improve my overall poker knowledge, such as, 7 card stud, omaha high-low split 8 or better, 7 card stud high-low 8 or better, and general poker theory. I would eventually like to be very proficient at all games, but first I just want to master the game of holdem. Especially, I want to master the game of limit holdem cash-games (internet and live). The only problem is that I always seem to lose money while I am playing limit holdem cash-games. The majority of my time playing in these games is done at $2/4 games while 4 tabling on the internet. Basically, I want to start off being able to beat the low limit stuff and then move into beating the middle-high limit stuff. Now over the past couple months I have became pretty good at small buy in ($10+1 and $20+2) no-limit holdem single table tournaments. But whenever I jump back over to limit holdem cash games I seem to lose my money. The most frusturating part is that I am not sure where I am going wrong because I feel like I have a good grip on the game. I understand pot odds, EV, etc... I play tight and aggressive and I also follow tight preflop guidelines. But even with all this understanding of these things I STILL LOSE MONEY.

However, I think I may have final figured out what my problem is and I want you guys to tell me whether or not you think this is it. My problem (I think) is that I am playing 4 tables and therefore, I cannot understand what types of players my opponents are. I also DO NOT have any of the programs/software which keeps track of these things for me. It seems to me that one of the most important strategies in cash games, is to understand the way your opponent plays, and then to be able to make adjustments based on that. Furthermore, it seems that most of the money in limit holdem comes from understanding whether marginal situations are profitable or unprofitable, and it seems to me that this would rely heavily on the players who are in the hand with you. Atleast one should have a general idea of the opposition, such as, tight passive, tight aggressive, loose passive, and loose aggressive. Another thing is that there are many players who understand the math very well, who still are very marginal winners. Yet someone who can read opponents and understand opponents seems to be able to become a big winner. For example, even Jennifer Harmon says/admits that she doesn't understand the math that well and that she just "goes off feel" and she is one of the biggest cash game winners in limit holdem.

Ok, so I realize this post was a little long and consisted of me rambling a bit, but I am just trying to figure out if this is what winning at limit holdem cash games is all about, which is getting to know your opponents and making proper adjustments. I feel like I already have a good understanding of basic strategy, poker math, etc... and yet, I am still a losing limit holdem player in cash games. And I definitely feel like I have a better understanding of the basic strategy, poker math, etc... then 90% or more of the $2/4 players online, and yet I am still losing. This makes me think that I need to get the software/programs which track my opponents and in live games I need to pay more attention. I feel like my previous knowledge has eliminated any major leaks in my game, but in order to be a winner I'll need to start playing my game according to the way my opponents play there game. What do you think?

Also, feel free to offer any questions, comments, advice, opinions, information, tips, etc... on this topic/post.

P.S. I am posting this in multiple forums so don't get upset if you see/read it all over the place. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Alex/Mugaaz
09-21-2005, 12:46 AM
1. No one can tell you what you're doing wrong, or right from this kind of post.
2. If you're an inexperienced player - pick one game.
3. Why are you 4 tabling if you think you're a losing player? To expidite the loss?
4. Even if you are a winning player, or the best player at 2/4 you could simply run bad. So your results don't mean squat. Go post some hands in the SSHE forum and reading some of the posts there. You will find out very fast how good or bad you are.
5. People play 4 tables to increase their hourly rate, not to play better. If you don't feel you're playing well then play 1 table.

Alobar
09-21-2005, 01:01 AM
1) dont cross post this everywhere

2) if you cant beat 2/4 stop 4 tablign it

3) if you cant beat 2/4 getting a program that will display your opponents stats and stuff, isnt going to suddenly make you capable of beating 2/4

4) study more, you obviously dont have a grip on things better than 90% of your opponents

5) did i mention to not cross post this everywehre?

Guthrie
09-21-2005, 01:45 AM
Quit poker and go back to school.

MicroBob
09-21-2005, 01:56 AM
most of what you say is correct generally speaking.

your chances ARE better if you aren't 4-tabling while you're still learning....and certainly the various software available can be valuable too.

But at 2/4 online you should be able to win just playing straight-forward.
If you had ZERO reads on all of your opponents (lets say they were all named X and they switched out on EVERY hand so you had no idea who you were playing against on any given hand) you should STILL be able to beat 2/4 reasonably easily.



Here's the part where you are in denial:
You do NOT have a good understanding of how to play.
you are familiar with terms like pot-odds, etc etc but you are obviously not incorporating them properly.

Saying that you feel like I have this stuff pretty much covered just doesn't cut it.
You are losing...and the biggst reason why is because you are playing incorrectly.

Playing too many tables and not having enough reads on your opponents and perhaps not maximizing on all the marginal situations can all be factors too.

But you seem to be looking for OTHER excuses for your losses besides the obvious one that you don't want to admit:
You aren't playing very good poker.


Thankfully there is the micro-limit and small-stakes forums here to help you remedy this situation. Read through some of the hand-histories and discussions there.
Perhaps post a hand or two for feedback.

focus on learning and cut back on the number of tables you are playing.

zephed
09-21-2005, 05:12 AM
Drop down to party .5/1, scour the microlimit forum, and learn how to beat this game.

SomethingClever
09-21-2005, 11:54 AM
Just playing "tight" and "aggressive" won't get you the money. You have to know how to play.

Playing one table is a good idea. Read other people's hand posts in Small Stakes and Heads Up and Short Handed.

And drop limits unless you hate money.

meow_meow
09-21-2005, 12:57 PM
Bob is totally on the money here.

Try not to be offended by his post, because it isn't meant to offend, it's meant to open your eyes.

Most poker players think they have it all figured out. Six months from now (if you are still playing), you'll look back and laugh at how little you understood the game. Six months further...rinse and repeat.

Just to reiterate what others have said:
You should be able to beat low limit holdem' without reads.
You need to get PT and a HUD for two reasons - to help with reads, but primarily to get a better understanding of your own play.

Playing NL STTs probably isn't good for your limit game. Apart from the way the cards are dealt, these games have almost nothing in common.

09-21-2005, 03:24 PM
Epiphany
1. A sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something.
2. A comprehension or perception of reality by means of a sudden intuitive realization


What if you have a sudden realization and comprehension of the grand scheme of things. The big picture has revealed itself to you in such a clear manifestation in your thoughts that you are overwhelmed by the presence of knowledge. What if the subject matter is of this event absolutely wrong. Is it still an epiphany?

SenecaJim
09-23-2005, 11:55 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Epiphany
1. A sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something.
2. A comprehension or perception of reality by means of a sudden intuitive realization


What if you have a sudden realization and comprehension of the grand scheme of things. The big picture has revealed itself to you in such a clear manifestation in your thoughts that you are overwhelmed by the presence of knowledge. What if the subject matter is of this event absolutely wrong. Is it still an epiphany?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if there is someone in the woods who can't see the trees.

09-23-2005, 03:16 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Epiphany
1. A sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something.
2. A comprehension or perception of reality by means of a sudden intuitive realization


What if you have a sudden realization and comprehension of the grand scheme of things. The big picture has revealed itself to you in such a clear manifestation in your thoughts that you are overwhelmed by the presence of knowledge. What if the subject matter is of this event absolutely wrong. Is it still an epiphany?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if there is someone in the woods who can't see the trees.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting

AustinDoug
09-23-2005, 03:49 PM
No. You have not had a limit hold em epiphany.