Post flop play

Jim Brier had an excellent point in the books forum about how little was written on post-flop play, while so much has said about pre-flop strategy. My belief is that pre-flop stategy is more quantifiable, and therefore easier to teach and debate. So the question becomes, how do you quantify post-flop play, knowing the different combinations of hands, player types, number of players, etc. is infinite? I was hoping that some of the members of this board would be so kind as to share their approach towards post-flop play.

Thanks in advance and I look forward to reading your comments.

I was hoping that some of the members of this board would be so kind as to share their approach towards post-flop play.


Isn't that what the entire forum is for already?

Yes it is, and I have learned a great deal from this board. However, I still believe that the post-flop plays are generally less agreed upon. My opinion is that the more seasoned players have sharpened their intuition to such a degree that their advantage is huge post-flop. What tends to lack on some of the post's(not all) reguarding post-flop play is the thought process that goes into the decisions. What I'm looking to get out of this post is not just a hand evaluation, but some of the ideas and strategies that the members of this board use when they are going into the turn. Maybe I'm just looking for some shortcuts that don't exist. The post from Jim got my mind going on this subject, as I believe I play fairly well post flop, but I also know that there is so much more to learn, and thought I would throw this question out there.

any two cards post-flop,the # of hands played will be finite.

Since player type(s) and # of players are also finite,the total finite combination of all three--hands played,player type(s),and # of players is finite--therefore,quantifiable.

Happy pokering,

Sitting Bull

Sometimes you can ask a question and not get real answers. Usually I take that to mean that someone shed a lot of sweat and blood to come up with an answer that works and they aren't going to share it for free. Personally, I think anyone could publish almost anything on this forum, and readers will either understand it because they all ready know it or the idea/concept goes right by them.


Your question is so complex. Take one player off a table and replace him/her with another and everything may change. You can talk about table types, groups of players, table standards at the moment, and so on and so forth for ever. To cover even half of it is a challenge I would not want to take on. I think that is why odds, perception, deception and such are talked about each particular hand. it's the best any sane person can do. jmo

EXPERIENCE, which requires hours and hours at the table, in which you should be observing the better players, watching what works for them, remembering your own personal successes, and replaying them to slowly to put together your own arsenal. Collecting these individual hands, and remebering them is the "secret"....one players view, anyway

I agree with this. In my original point in the books forum, I stated the same thing, and that this was why it couldn't be taught.

You forgot the ETC. !! the fourth variable.

How then would you approach a teachable stratagy, and why do you think more has not been written about it?

perfectly. I didn't expect to get too many responses, as I firmly believe, like Reggie stated, that experience is the key. The variables involved are so many, that it would be an extremely difficult task.

operationally define"ETC"??

If one assumes that the 4th variable,ETC,defined in some operational way, is negligible, then one is outside the realm of Theoretical Poker and clearly within the domains of Applied Poker

Hence,I believe by simply considering the variables that U enumerated without taking into consideration the "ETC" variable,U will always present a correct model of "Applied Poker" which will clearly simulate realistic situations.

Hence,in order to obtain the "money", abstract theoretical poker knowledge is not necessary and studying poker to that extent might be a waste of one's valuable mental energy which would be better served by concentrating on the applied aspects of poker.


Happy pokering,

Sitting Bull

are clearly within the realm of "Applied Poker".

All your variables are operationally definable.


Great post!

A lot of valuable information.

Thanks

Larry"Sitting Bull"Duplessis

excellent teacher,but a firm basic theoretical knowledge is mandatory to improve in one's application of the game.

Just don't go too far with the theoretical aspect

of poker.


Happy pokering,

Sitting Bull

The secret to postflop is calling when I should fold, raising when I should call, folding when I should raise, checking when I should bet, betting when I should check, folding when I should call, calling when I should raise, and raising when I should fold.


As proof that this is true, if I always did what I should do, then I'd be rich and retired by now, from playing poker, and I wouldn't be reading 2+2. So we know that I clearly need to be doing more of what I should do, which must be different than what I do do.


What is should? Is it what you the individual thinks I should do? Is it what my opponents think I should do? Is it what the collective poker mind thinks I should do? Is it what I think I should do?


It must be none of those things, since it cannot be all. So, what I should do, is what I do do. And so should you.


Tommy

well you should do as much as you can get away with. at some point in the adjustment dance you should be playing weak-tight.


if you can play more than just holdem youll be a lot happier.


brad

if you can play more than just holdem youll be a lot happier


I'd like to ammend that very true statement to read "If you can play more than just poker you'll be a lot happier."


Best of luck. Billy (LTL)

. . .uses the phrase "do do" twice.


I don't know what you should do, or what you do do, but I think I know what you were doing when your wrote this post. /images/wink.gif

puff puff pass

Bet, if you have top pair. Raise if you can beat top pair.