Good or Bad advice?

[William]

I have been reading posts at this forum for a long time now.
I am a poker pro. That means that I make a living playing poker. That's all I do. I have a college degree and have had jobs in the past. I even had my own company for a while, but because of the freedom poker gives me, I have chosen this life; at least for the time beeing.

What I want to say, it's that there are 3 kind of posters at this place.
1: The ones that ask the questions
2:the ones that know what they are talking about.
3: The ones that comment everything, believing they know all the answers, but are quite often mistaken.

I won't mention any names, as it would start a thread of personal agressions, and that is not my intention, but I do want to say that much of the information/advice given in this forum is wrong. Those who ask should be carefull and those who can't refrain from giving their advice all the time, should at least do it in a less convincing way.

I probably make many mistakes myself(and I am glad I make them, that's the best way to get better at this game) but befóre I give my advice to someone who needs it, I make pretty sure I have good arguments.

Take care,
William

[DougBrennan]

Not to argue with your position at all but...

I do not consider myself to be one of the premier players or advice givers on this forum (as I think I make clear in many of my posts) but I have found that giving advice or comments when I think I have something vaguely useful to say is helpful to my game, forcing me to clarify my thought processes.

I would find it helpful to have more experienced players like yourself tell me in a reply when they believe I am incorrect. In this way you can help both the original poster and the replier with one message.

So chime in, it would be instructive, and I, for one, would not take offense at being corrected.

[CrisBrown]

[William]

Hi Doug,
I know you well, we have played many SNG's at PS(today, yesterday, AA against 66) and I have nothing but respect for you.
I do not at all wish to say that only my advice counts. I don't give my opinion very often, I like to read what the others mean and make small humoristic remarks every now and then. There are some outstanding posters at 2+2 and everybody is entitled to say what they mean. That's also the way it should be, creating a debate. But some posters, give their (often poor) opinion in such an authoritary way that less experienced players can't anything else that assume they are reading advice from an expert.
It's okay to say "here is what I mean" not allways "here is how it is".

Take care,
William

[eastbay]

Will,

Uh, welcome to the internet?

Regards...

[Bluff1]

Usually when one gives bad advice one of the better players on this board is quick to correct them. I usually say looks like to me or this is how I would have played it. I have replied to some messages on this forum and had everyone disagree with me. I then knew I was dead wrong and moved on. But it is really a help to us average players when we post a reply and the good players tell us we are wrong. It way it helps everyone and it usually brings out every angle on how a hand could have been played.

[DrPhysic]

William,
I may be one of the ones to whom you refer, however:
As an example, there was a discussion earlier today between myself and Scooterdoo re his AKo post,
My response was qualified by the statement that "I know you are a better player than I am, but here's how I would have played it." there were several posts back and forth.

My posts are almost always qualified in similar manner ie:
"newbe opinion:" in several cases i have thought through a situation, expressed my opinion, then noted that "Now the top players will educate me again as to the error of my ways." And in some cases they have.

But given that, I think the discussion and interaction is critical to the learning process. Doug expressed that lucidly. We aren't always right, but thinking it through, and figuring it out then having one of the better players correct us when appropriate, is the nature of the discourse and the process of learning.

When Amarillo Slim, Sailor Roberts, and D Brunson compared notes on hands and strategies 30 years ago when they were on the road together, I have no doubt that they weren't always right the first time when they expressed an idea. Had they always been right, there would have been no learning process. But they figured it out and got it right through the process of interaction.

I agree that there are players like yourself and many others here that know a lot more than the beginners, and hopefully correct us when we blow it. But keeping the communcication line open and encouraging discussion of ideas is a very valid learning process. That is the inherent value in a forum like 2+2. Socrates thought it up as a teaching tool and learning process some time ago.

Again, my opinion for what it's worth.

Doc

[Prickly Pete]

William, fwiw I agree with your comments.

For a newcomer, they could do a lot worse than just reading every Fossilman post.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
William, fwiw I agree with your comments.

For a newcomer, they could do a lot worse than just reading every Fossilman post.


[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. One begins to wonder why Fossilman is so generous with his expert advice. He seems to be educating many here.

-EV for him? Only infinitesimally so? Who knows.

Of course, I would note that Fossilman's advice seems tuned to a field which is capable of laying down. In a no fold-em game, it is probably too aggressive. That's my experience in trying to follow it.

[SossMan]

William,
I agree with you in general that people who don't know what they're talking about shouldn't come out and say, categorically, that THIS is how you should play this situation. However, this forum is generally pretty good about qualifying their opinions with a statement noting that it's his/her opinion, and not gospel. Now, if Greg or some of the other Pooh-bah's make a matter of fact statement regarding a certain play, then you can pretty much bank on the fact that it's +EV.

I understand where you're coming from, though. It's a good point.

[DougBrennan]

I had a very esoteric treatise written on the nature of learning, but it disappeared into computer air, so I'll try again.

This has become a very interesting thread, and I think it illustrates the importance of filtering information. Just because something has been said, or written, that does not make it right, or useful to you as an individual.

It is imperative to sift information, taking what strikes you as correct, or relevant to your style, and, if not discarding, at least only storing the rest.

I agree that Greg (Fossilman) offers the most consistently useful information, but if I tried to employ everything he said at once, I'd trip all over myself.
But read, store, use what you can when you can, and discard what doesn't work for you for whatever reason.

Which I believe is, as Doc pointed out, the Socratic method of learning.

One of the aspects of this forum I like the best is that ego and emotion play a very small part in the exchange of information.

[sam h]

Are you "William" on Pokerstars?

If so, you play a big stack very well from what I remember (haven't played there in many months).

[William]

Hi everybody,

Thanks for the very positive response/comments I have read in this thread.

First I want to say that I can not agree more with all of you that the best way of learning is both to listen to other people's opinion, no matter how wrong or right they are, (at the very least we learn how they think) and to express one own's. In that way we explore all the angles of a problem and often, new ideas are revealed, even to the more experienced players. I think however that is is also important not to express those ideas and opinions in a style that will lead the less experienced players to believe that those are the ideas of a true expert. Because there are not many of them. I am certainly not one of the few, but I know enough to see that sometimes what is written in this forum is as wrong as it can get.
Please don't feel personally concerned, because I am not aiming at anybody in particular, I just mean, I repeat myself, that there is no need to say "this is the right way to do it and only this way" unless you are absolutely certain that you are correct.

It is also correct that Greg is one of the most valuable posters in this forum. I don't think he is so concerned about educating, because he knows, just as any good player does, that those who understand will eventually figure it out by themselves. The rest, you could explain it 100 times a day for a 100 days in a row, the very next time you meet them at the table, they will be making the same mistake.

Oh yes, btw, I am MobyDick at Stars.

Take care,
William

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Thanks to William and to all the rest of you who had nice things to say about me.

I participate so freely in this forum because it helps me improve my game. If it also improves the average level of my opponents, that's OK. It improves me just as much, so I'm not losing any ground to those of you here, and there are a LOT more folks who aren't here, and whom we are all passing quickly by.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[La Brujita]

Funny what everyone said about Greg, I was going to say the same thing. I read every post he makes and learn from pretty much every one.

When Greg posts something I disagree with, my first thought is I am wrong and need to rethink my game.

If I continue to rethink it and still disagree (as an example I disagree with his thoughts of never giving up positive ev in a SnG tournament), I come to the conclusion that this might be one of the grey areas that makes poker so interesting.

One thing I struggle with is determining how and when to vary my game in the face of opponents who may or (more likely) may not have a read on me. Varying one's game is just one reason you might have two valid ways to play a hand (imo).

Regards

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

3: The ones that comment everything, believing they know all the answers, but are quite often mistaken.

I think the categories you have may not take into account how some people view the forum and its utility.

I, for one, comment on a lot of things, but do not think I know everything. The way I learn via a dialectic like this is to make my own analysis, take a stand, and see how that stand is answered. I don't hold myself out as any kind of expert and regularly state that.

Much of the best advice I've gotten have come from situations where someone (usually Greg) points out the flaws in my reasoning.

-the above is a disclaimer for any bad "advice" I may have given in the past - /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Sometimes, people are just wrong. Often, however, the two people disagreeing with one another have very different games in mind.

So, when somebody posts a hand about how they raised to 3xBB in early position on the first hand of an online multi, and the next guy reraises all-in, and should they call with KK, they will sometimes hear some very different absolute responses. Often those differences, and the stridency of their disagreement, is due to the very different experiences each person has had with such spots. Some people would only reraise with AA here, others would never overbet with AA, and everybody has seen their opponents do different things. If you've only ever seen AA in the opponent's hand when you've called such an overbet, you'll obviously be telling this poster to fold his KK. ;-)

So, assumptions about the "typical" opponent have a big impact on advice. And advice that is good against a loose aggressive maniac can certainly be wrong when applied against a rock.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Pitcher]

Quote
"I don't think he is so concerned about educating, because he knows, just as any good player does, that those who understand will eventually figure it out by themselves. The rest, you could explain it 100 times a day for a 100 days in a row, the very next time you meet them at the table, they will be making the same mistake."

I love this quote. I can't help myself. Sometimes I will comment to a poor player on line (which I know is a mistake, shouldn't be educating) about a play. Then someone will chime in telling me to stop educating. I usually make some catty reply to the affect that "I could tell you exactly how to play against me in this situation and 99% of you still wouldn't do it"
I can be a real jerk about this, but for some reason it hits my hot button. Oh well, we all have our "issues"

Great thread.

Pitcher

[Prickly Pete]

I generally don't preach at the table, but this is probably a "To each his own" area.

I did recently have a fun one. 1st hand or two of a SNG and I limp UTG with KK, hoping for the reraise. Sure enough, someone raises to 60 or 75 or something and I pop it back to about 200. Now, whenever I make this play, I always think it's so obvious, but am amazed when I still get players. So this guy raises me allin and I call, half-expecting to see his AA. Well, he has AQo and the board comes up KQJTx.

I don't care about the bad beat, but the guy had the nerve to say that's what I get for slowplaying my big pair. And he went on to say he would've folded to an initial raise. I think he was dead serious and not screwing with me. So I gave him a smiley face or something and told him he was probably right. Paid $55 for a note on a moron.

[NotMitch]

[ QUOTE ]
I generally don't preach at the table, but this is probably a "To each his own" area.

I did recently have a fun one. 1st hand or two of a SNG and I limp UTG with KK, hoping for the reraise. Sure enough, someone raises to 60 or 75 or something and I pop it back to about 200. Now, whenever I make this play, I always think it's so obvious, but am amazed when I still get players. So this guy raises me allin and I call, half-expecting to see his AA. Well, he has AQo and the board comes up KQJTx.

I don't care about the bad beat, but the guy had the nerve to say that's what I get for slowplaying my big pair. And he went on to say he would've folded to an initial raise. I think he was dead serious and not screwing with me. So I gave him a smiley face or something and told him he was probably right. Paid $55 for a note on a moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know all in preflop was slowplaying, learn something new everyday.

[Prickly Pete]

Lol, nor did I. Just watch the chat boxes in Party tourneys and you can learn a lot of things. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Chad4yew]

#5 would be someone who reads the posts, thinks things over, and only asks questions or posts responses when i need something explained or am sure of the situation.

oh well.... /images/graemlins/grin.gif
Chuck

[Scooterdoo]

[ QUOTE ]
As an example, there was a discussion earlier today between myself and Scooterdoo re his AKo post,
My response was qualified by the statement that "I know you are a better player than I am, but here's how I would have played it."

[/ QUOTE ]

And I think I said that he shouldn't be so sure about that! As Greg pointed out in another great post on this thread, everyone's experience comes from the games they are used to being in, the type of opponents they are up against, and what works and does not work for them. I guess we can all include a signature line in our posts which identify our experience level and results at these levels <g>. The nature of these forums however is for us all to interact and chime in when we see something that is wrong. In fact, from a learning perspective, lessons tend to sink in more when someone makes a mistake or an iffy statement and others respond and a discussion ensues over it, versus some expert making a definitive statement and nothing else is said on the matter. So sometimes it will be actually more instructive for someone to post bad advice which leads to an intelligent thread on the matter with various points of view than posting good advice where nobody even comments so the thread doesn't generate much interest.

A few months back Daniel Negreanu replied a few times to one of my posts disagreeing with something I said. It was very valuable.

I will also point out however, that what may be true at the high-stakes tournament level is not necessarily true at the stakes that most of us play at. The converse is also true. I forgot the specifics, but a few weeks ago David Sklansky made a post and suggested a strategy on some hand and insisted that all of the tournament players would make the same move with this hand and that opponents would respond a certain way. I was really perplexed because I was so sure at the levels I play at ($100 SitnGos) that rarely would an opponent react the way that David says they would in the high stakes world.

[CrisBrown]

Hi All,

I know I was the one to whom William was referring, and frankly, he's right. I've been playing terribly of late, probably for reasons having very little to do with poker and a lot to do with work stress, and that same misjudgment is showing up in my (usually far-too-quick) replies here.

Oh well. I'm human. Very, very human.

For the record, my usual practice here in responding to a hand analysis is to fire off my quick first read, the same as I would customarily do if I were playing the hand at the table. Then I usually find out how wrong I was, and learn from the experience. (Thus my "Quick Answer" post of last night.)

I'd like to think I'm (usually) a sound player, although I have begun to question that of late. Perhaps that's due to bad beats. Perhaps my game got too predictable. Perhaps I have simply been unlucky in running into a slew of monster hands at the worst possible times.

Regardless, I have a lot to learn, and I learn far more from this forum than I contribute to it.

Cris

[triplc]

As a former teacher, I know for a fact that two of the best ways that people learn a particular skill is 1)to teach that skill to someone else and 2) to learn from one's mistakes (one that I employ more often than I care to admit).

The spirit of both of these ideas is why I both post advice occasionally (usually I'm asking the questions or lurking), and why these forums help me out so much.

First, if I post a hand, or give advice I welcome the replies from anyone and everyone that wants to give it. I have learned to put a little more weight on some posters (Greg, Kurn, CrisBrown) than others. And I, like the good Doctor, try to preface any advice I give with a disclaimer. I will also use examples from my past play as illustrations of why I am thinking that way.

Teaching by giving advice in these forums and having that advice corrected by others are too valuable a part of my poker education for me to stop. I don't think that was the spirit of your post, William, but I hope it doesn't scare others off from posting simply because they are early in their poker education. Let us newbies get to where you are...even if it means we might take a few of your chips someday /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

[PrayingMantis]

Hey Cris,

I don't know who exactly William was referring (he said no one in particular), but I can sure tell you that as a newbie, posting my first few questions here, your answers were a real help for me (I can remember, for example, a long reply to a question of mine, in which you made a lengthy explanation, with hands for illustration, of the "bluff-catcher" concept). On the other hand, I remember a few times where I didn't really agree with your thinking, but still, it was good to read.

I'm not reading any answer here as a gospel, not yours, and not even Greg's most solid advice (which are truely great). I want to understand why something is true, and not applying it just because it was written in 2+2. I like to think about it myself, and get my own conclusions. And as a student of the game, I find any reply helpful. Of course, I'd like only the most solid and expirienced players to ansewr, and they better be three times WSOP champions, but that's not realistic... (and not even relevant, because the low buy-in's I play).


Poker is a game of constant critical thinking, regarding yourself and others. I think this forum, in a way, has some similar characteristics: you shouldn't accept everything you read, you must apply your own judgement, and in the bottom line: it's not exactly about good or bad advice, it's more about what you're doing with it.

So, don't stop posting answers, Cris, and for all the others: thank you for spending time thinking about other people's hands. I really appreciate each and every advice, as long as you're not trying to knowingly damage my game... /images/graemlins/grin.gif


Nice thread, (nt?)

PrayingMantis

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
3: The ones that comment everything... but are quite often mistaken.


[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely fit this part of the definition - no need to point that out.

[ QUOTE ]
believing they know all the answers,

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely don't fit this part, and I hope I don't come across that way. If I do, call me out (or PM me if you prefer). /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

My goal when I post is to answer the question "what would you do and why?" unless the poster specifically makes a different request. It is not my goal to ever say "this is what I would do and anything else is wrong."

I believe that at least 99% of the other posters are doing the same thing and I appreciate all of their posts (whether I think they're right, wrong, or just different). It's better to get feedback that is a little offbase to spur one's thinking than to get no feedback at all.

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe that at least 99% of the other posters are doing the same thing and I appreciate all of their posts (whether I think they're right, wrong, or just different)


[/ QUOTE ]

I echo this.

I love every bit of reasoning and advice that I see on here. Some of it (not very much, IMO) is way off base of course, but it's still thought provoking, and as someone else said, the really dangerous bits of bad advice provoke lots of reaction so they're easy to identify.

May I take this opportunity to apologise for all the bad advice I have given in the past and will give out in the future. I am told I have a rather authoritative and persuasive tone (years of practice writing academic papers I guess) which might make some of my nonsense sound better informed than it is. It's all just best-guess stuff from me I'm afraid.

Listen to Greg. And fnurt, if he ever posts again.

Guy.

[thomastem]

I'm replying to this post before reading other threads. I'm sorry if I repeat something already said.

Forums even articles or books can't be taken as gospel without thought and or discussion. I've seen several, for example, articles on Cardplayer that were wrong. I think everyone should take information given freely as something that needs to be proved with logic.

That said, as someone new to the tourneys and the tourney forum I want to give my honest opinion. It is great for me when I am wrong and posters point out how wrong my thinking was. If I stop posting because I am worried that I'm not qualified to post I'm losing a tool that will make me a better player.