hot tub man # 1
06-30-2003, 04:40 AM
I was just fooling around on poker pages when I came across this latest article. this was the worst, most off target poker advice I have ever heard any respected writer give to his readers. He states......
"First, recognize that certain of your foes at certain times feel like they're cursed. Maybe they've had some recent bad beats or maybe they just dwell in negativity. In any event, bad luck has afflicted them and they expect it to strike again; they live, in other words, in F.E.A.R. These foes will give you a predictive tell, a tell which lets you anticipate how they'll react to the fall of certain cards. If all goes according to play, your opponents' own anxieties will win you the pot."
OK, fine. But then he says...........
What you're looking for in hold'em, for example, are scary flops, such as three to a straight or three to a flush, that you can "own", by playing as if you're on that draw. If the draw gets there, your chosen victim will experience a momentary lapse of reason. His judgment temporarily clouded by a fatalistic sense of here we go again! he won't pause to consider that you're betting a hand you don't have. He'll just see himself as damned unlucky once more, and fold his hand without a second thought. Why would he call? He put you on a draw, and, because he's cursed, your draw got there.
"You can help reinforce this set of mistaken assumptions by "betraying" yourself with a betting pattern consistent with the draw you aren't on. Suppose you're heads up against one such Gloomy Gus and looking at a flop of T-9-8 rainbow. If he bets, go ahead and raise. Figure he's got top pair, good kicker. He, meanwhile, figures you for a naked jack or a seven. You're not actually looking to hit on the turn. You're hoping to hit a brick and have your opponent check, so that you can check too. He'll conclude that your raise on the flop was a foreclosure raise, and will now firmly put you on the straight draw. If the river comes queen, jack, seven or six, his own dour evaluation of your hand has to put you on a straight or new top pair. Skittish as he is, he knows he's beaten. He checks, you bet, he folds. Happy outcome. All because your foe feels snakebit and because you played the hand in a way which let him put you firmly on a hand that beats him.
If you should be "unfortunate" enough to hit your hand on the turn (say a jack comes), you can still carry this gambit through by checking behind your foe on the turn. If he checks the river, you bet; if he bets, you raise. To a player caught in the throes of F.E.A.R., your bet on the turn would have looked very much like a bluff. But checking the turn (as if to induce a bluff) and betting or raising the river is consistent with a trap, not a bluff, and that's where your foe will put you."
And finally.........
"Different situation, same concept: Suppose you're in the big blind and it's folded around to the button, who makes a standard real estate raise. A call from you here can be consistent with a medium ace. Keep this in mind, because this is the hand you want him to put you on. Now here comes a flop of 9-7-3. Not much of anything for anyone. You check, he bets, you call. What does this tell him? That you have a weak piece of the flop, or overcards, or a bit of both with something like A-3 or A-7. The turn is a 2, and nothing seems to have changed. You check. Your foe checks too, because he's feeling star-crossed and he doesn't want to bet again into a pot that you've demonstrated you won't be bluffed off of. (What does he hold here? Since he made a real estate raise preflop, he could have as little as nothing at all.) The river comes an ace, and you gleefully bet out -- betraying your glee if you can. Your opponent knows there's no point in calling... you obviously hit your hand! He'll feel cursed that an ace fell on the river, but also (incorrectly) smug for making a good laydown in the face of a bad outcome."
First he wants us to represent a draw heads up with no pot odds. Then, he suggests we raise or call on the flop, hoping that this draw gets there with no money in the pot. Next he fails to take into consideration that this opponent may actaually hold a hand stronger than top pair, or that he himself may actually hold the draw that he suggests we represent. Then he goes on to assume that this oppenent will just toss a made hand in on the river when heads up for one bet. Is some sort of sick joke? This is the worst poker advice I have come across in a long time. I have heard people speak highly of his book but I for one will not be buying it.
"First, recognize that certain of your foes at certain times feel like they're cursed. Maybe they've had some recent bad beats or maybe they just dwell in negativity. In any event, bad luck has afflicted them and they expect it to strike again; they live, in other words, in F.E.A.R. These foes will give you a predictive tell, a tell which lets you anticipate how they'll react to the fall of certain cards. If all goes according to play, your opponents' own anxieties will win you the pot."
OK, fine. But then he says...........
What you're looking for in hold'em, for example, are scary flops, such as three to a straight or three to a flush, that you can "own", by playing as if you're on that draw. If the draw gets there, your chosen victim will experience a momentary lapse of reason. His judgment temporarily clouded by a fatalistic sense of here we go again! he won't pause to consider that you're betting a hand you don't have. He'll just see himself as damned unlucky once more, and fold his hand without a second thought. Why would he call? He put you on a draw, and, because he's cursed, your draw got there.
"You can help reinforce this set of mistaken assumptions by "betraying" yourself with a betting pattern consistent with the draw you aren't on. Suppose you're heads up against one such Gloomy Gus and looking at a flop of T-9-8 rainbow. If he bets, go ahead and raise. Figure he's got top pair, good kicker. He, meanwhile, figures you for a naked jack or a seven. You're not actually looking to hit on the turn. You're hoping to hit a brick and have your opponent check, so that you can check too. He'll conclude that your raise on the flop was a foreclosure raise, and will now firmly put you on the straight draw. If the river comes queen, jack, seven or six, his own dour evaluation of your hand has to put you on a straight or new top pair. Skittish as he is, he knows he's beaten. He checks, you bet, he folds. Happy outcome. All because your foe feels snakebit and because you played the hand in a way which let him put you firmly on a hand that beats him.
If you should be "unfortunate" enough to hit your hand on the turn (say a jack comes), you can still carry this gambit through by checking behind your foe on the turn. If he checks the river, you bet; if he bets, you raise. To a player caught in the throes of F.E.A.R., your bet on the turn would have looked very much like a bluff. But checking the turn (as if to induce a bluff) and betting or raising the river is consistent with a trap, not a bluff, and that's where your foe will put you."
And finally.........
"Different situation, same concept: Suppose you're in the big blind and it's folded around to the button, who makes a standard real estate raise. A call from you here can be consistent with a medium ace. Keep this in mind, because this is the hand you want him to put you on. Now here comes a flop of 9-7-3. Not much of anything for anyone. You check, he bets, you call. What does this tell him? That you have a weak piece of the flop, or overcards, or a bit of both with something like A-3 or A-7. The turn is a 2, and nothing seems to have changed. You check. Your foe checks too, because he's feeling star-crossed and he doesn't want to bet again into a pot that you've demonstrated you won't be bluffed off of. (What does he hold here? Since he made a real estate raise preflop, he could have as little as nothing at all.) The river comes an ace, and you gleefully bet out -- betraying your glee if you can. Your opponent knows there's no point in calling... you obviously hit your hand! He'll feel cursed that an ace fell on the river, but also (incorrectly) smug for making a good laydown in the face of a bad outcome."
First he wants us to represent a draw heads up with no pot odds. Then, he suggests we raise or call on the flop, hoping that this draw gets there with no money in the pot. Next he fails to take into consideration that this opponent may actaually hold a hand stronger than top pair, or that he himself may actually hold the draw that he suggests we represent. Then he goes on to assume that this oppenent will just toss a made hand in on the river when heads up for one bet. Is some sort of sick joke? This is the worst poker advice I have come across in a long time. I have heard people speak highly of his book but I for one will not be buying it.