Logic and patience in tournament poker [Archive]

William

02-23-2004, 01:59 PM

Hi all,

Thanks for your reply to my "nice day" post.
My son won't be getting another racket, they both (I have 2 sons, 12 and 10 y.o.) allready have "top of the cream" equipment, but they did got a couple of playstation2 games.

All the regulars know that the same questions are posted again and again; some newbie comes around, and asks about something that is discussed twíce a week, and we all repeat ourselves. Sometimes you can see that a poster has changed his point of view on a certain subject; that usually means he has improved his game, so one way of beeing aware of your own development, is to ask yourself if your answer to the new post would be the same you gave 2 weeks ago to a similar post, and if not, why have you altered your opinion?

Anyway, you have probably also noticed that some subjects are very popular some weeks, everybody talking about the same topics, and then suddenly, some other topic becomes the subject of the week, and so on.
As we are many in both this forum and the multi-table forum ( and I still like to think about the 2 forums as one big one ), many ideas derive from the original subject, which is interesting, because it allows you to see how different two minds can reason.

Right now, it seems that the popular subject is agression; overagression would I call it in many cases.

I read a lot about agressive blind-stealing/re-stealing moves at the middle/high levels, about contra moves to defend blinds, about calling all-in with small/medium pairs or master plans of calling, then moving in with less than medium hands if an ace doesn't flop because we have a read of Ax on the opponent.
Usually all this stories end with the poster busting out, "my read was right, but this or that hapenned..."

you have to remember, that when Ax is against Kx, if an A hits the flop, Kx is practically out of the tourney, while if a K hits the flop, Ax still has to get lucky, but not nearly as much as in the reverse situation.
I am of course saying that no matter how diabolic your plan is, if you choose to get involved with an inferior hand, you will more often than not be handling your stack to the better hand.

You can not keep doing the same smart move over and over again. It might work once or twice, but the other players are not totally stupid (even if sometimes they may appear so). Even the less gifted ones are bound to notice that you are getting fancy way to often and it just takes one call to really cripple your stack or bust you.
You can't win with bad cards, that is a fact, and if you don't have a solid image, is just a question of time before you're in the rail.

Agressive acts without a propper hand have to be made in an intelligent way. The circumstances have to be right, and your reasons to act that way have to be based in more than just deciding that because he is in the button, he must be read as "Ax ". If somebody knows a method of making a read on opponents that justifies gambling all your chips, please name your price, I'm buying...
It is certainly correct to be very agressive with your good hands, doing the same with garbage holdings is just gambling and showing that you are not even close to being a good player.
Remember it's not only if you can get away with it this time, you are also sending a signal to the rest of the table about your playing style.
Patience is one of the most important features of poker. It certainly is more exciting being involved in many pots and making speculative moves, but it generally ends the same way: with a small window in the middle of your screen thanking you for playing and telling you that you finished in xxx position.
If poker is fun to you and winning or loosing won't change your lifestyle, by all means, keep the action going (and I hope to soon be joining your table), If you want to become a consistant winner, then it's going to be quite boring sometimes, but you can't get around patience and logic.

Take care,
William

ThaSaltCracka

02-23-2004, 02:28 PM

I agree with you William, I notice if I bluff somone out of a hand, I am more likely to try it again. I think it has something to do with "gettin away with" something you shouldn't have, ya know? like shoplifting, you get away with it once, you try again, until finally you get caught. This was something I had a problem with for a while with my game.

Another point I want to make is about close calls. This would be making a call which is very hard, borderline fold/call and being right. This makes you feel like you can read your opponent so well, that you always think you make the right call, ie cathcing them will they were bluffing. This happened to me twice last week. I caught an opponent bluffing a huge pot, with a flush draw, and was right. The next time I called someone going all in with a flush draw, on a flush board, I had a set. While the second hand I lost, I still made the right read on him and called. But after these two hands I felt like I could read my opponents, I was making calls I shouldn't had, and I was losing.
Both of these were two big leaks for me for a while. Patience definitley works in the long run.

La Brujita

02-23-2004, 02:30 PM

I think this post might be directed at some of the threads of the last week but I will just speak with respect to how it relates to me.

I win my money by playing solid boring poker. I play tight but extremely aggressive (especially with shallow money). I sometimes get into one or two day periods of bad play after starting to take bad beats where I try to out trick my opponents.

This came back to haunt me yesterday at least five times when I gave free cards and got beat by outdraws. My normal boring style is to bet strong and make it expensive to have someone draw out on me and if they want to call incorrectly so be it.

My worst move yesterday was checking a set of nines five handed with a huge pot on a flop of 9jk. A queen came on the turn and I had to release the set.

I agree and have tried to make the point in various other threads that making plays or reads against unkown opponents who may or may not play rationally is a tricky proposition at best. Mike Caro's most recent audio lesson about loose wiring at Card Player speaks to this quite well (if indirectly). If you haven't heard it I would check it out.

I have posted in various threads that it is important pick your spots to try to pick up pots if you are not risking too much of your stack (a semi bluff).

William, is the semi bluffing I advocate one of the fancy plays you are talking about that get people in trouble? The reason I ask is I am trying to get a feel for how much people successfully semi bluff in these one table tournaments. I would suspect the answer would vary.

Ocho

02-23-2004, 02:31 PM

Nice post. Thanks for the food for thought.

Two of the last three tournaments that I've played I made similar mistakes to those you discuss. One was QJs and the other was KQo. On both hands, I called an all in when conditions were not optimal for me to do so. I had a good week overall, but these two plays have been haunting me. I'll read your post (and the secontion on making all hands 27 in Tournament Poker For Advanced Players) at least a few more times.

CrisBrown

02-23-2004, 02:57 PM

Hi William,

[ QUOTE ]
I read a lot about agressive blind-stealing/re-stealing moves at the middle/high levels, about contra moves to defend blinds, about calling all-in with small/medium pairs or master plans of calling, then moving in with less than medium hands if an ace doesn't flop because we have a read of Ax on the opponent.
Usually all this stories end with the poster busting out, "my read was right, but this or that hapenned..."

You can not keep doing the same smart move over and over again. It might work once or twice, but the other players are not totally stupid (even if sometimes they may appear so). Even the less gifted ones are bound to notice that you are getting fancy way to often and it just takes one call to really cripple your stack or bust you. You can't win with bad cards, that is a fact, and if you don't have a solid image, is just a question of time before you're in the rail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, we have very different approaches to the game, so it will come as no great surprise that I'm going to disagree in part, although I'm going to agree with more in the end than I will disagree in the beginning.

The idea that "you can't win with bad cards" is, in my opinion, a mistake. You have to win with bad cards some of the time, because good cards simply don't come often enough to carry you through.

The Gap Concept -- that you need a better hand to call than you do to open-raise -- is fundamental to tournament play. The Gap usually gets wider as the tournament progresses, so it pays to raise with a lot of kinds of hands, especially a hand where you won't mind folding if reraised. That means raising with "bad cards." Assuming a 3xBB steal-raise, you only need 2/3rds of your steals to succeed to stay even, or perhaps even a bit ahead if your opponent simply calls and your rags hit (as they will sometimes).

Similarly, I think the idea that "if you don't have a solid image, it is just a question of time before you're on the rail" is also incorrect. See The Answer Lies Within You (http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=13244 ) by Daniel Negreanu, and a two-part series Wake Up And Smell The Coffee, Pt. I (http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=12761 ) and Wake Up And Smell The Coffee, Pt. II (http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=12782 ) by Mike Sexton for an excellent discussion of why different players use different styles, and why a solid style is not necessarily the best for everyone.

That having been said, it's easy to get overaggressive, and that's something I have to work on. While you can (and you must) win pots with bad cards, you can't win many showdowns with bad cards. And that means if you're on a marginal hand, you have to avoid showdowns, especially if you're going to be committed to that showdown pre-flop. There are a couple of exceptions, but they're irrelevant to the overall point.

In both of my really bone-headed plays yesterday, I got into an unnecessary showdown with a marginal hand, one I could and should have avoided. It didn't help that I lost every race (overcards vs. pocket pairs or vice versa), and in fact that probably contributed to my recklessness.

At the end of the evening, I realized I probably should have quit about five hours earlier, after my first race hand of the day (AJs in BB vs. all-in by very short-stacked SB) had such absurd results (I hit A and J on the flop, but he hit a set on the river). And if that hand had taken me out of the tournament, I probably would have. As it was, I got back into the tournament (the $215 multi) and was in the top 1/3rd when I got stupid.

While past cards don't predict future cards, that AJs vs. 99 hand was hovering in the back of my mind for the rest of the evening -- that disabling mantra "It's going to be one of those days" -- and that's a terrible mindset when you're playing poker. I should've quit for the night after the $215 multi, and before I'd tilted away half of my profits for what had until then been an excellent February.

So yes, I agree that you have to be patient in this game. You have to wait for the right opportunities -- either the right cards, or the right spots with bad cards -- to make your moves. And bluff-reraising against a stack that can cripple you is rarely if ever the right opportunity.

Cris

Stagemusic

02-23-2004, 03:02 PM

Nice post O' Temporary Top of the Heap. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I agree with much of what you have to say. However, the problem of patience vs. aggressiveness is not always so easily defined. I think you must also factor in the fact that tournaments, both 1 table and multi, are competitive events as well as money making opportunities. As a former athlete I am a very competitive person. The opportunity to channel my competitive spirit is one of the reasons that I eventually gravitated toward poker long after the crowd stopped cheering. To me, the win is more important than the money.

Like business, money in poker is just the way that we keep score. If I have more at the end of a certain period of time than what I started with, I am winning. If I don't then I am in a "slump" and need to work on some aspect of my game. I am in a contant state of competition at the tables. Competition breeds aggressiveness.

It is very easy to preach patience to those that know that patience does indeed pay. However, to those of us that are competitive in spirit, patience is a foreign concept. We may be able to talk for hours upon patience' virtue but we will never entirely embrace it.

As I said, nice post. Utopia aside, it would be good for us all to practice patience a little more often. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

William

02-23-2004, 04:19 PM

Hi Cris,

A few comments to your reply to my post.

The idea that "you can't win with bad cards" is, in my opinion, a mistake. You have to win with bad cards some of the time, because good cards simply don't come often enough to carry you through.

It is obvious that you are not going to win very often if you only play premium hands. And I believe that's not what I am saying, but it is important to choose the right spots and certainly not with bad cards, there are lot og good cards to choose from, even if they don't fall into the "premium" category. Here too, patience is a must.

The Gap Concept -- that you need a better hand to call than you do to open-raise -- is fundamental to tournament play

I have noticed that you have just been reading about the gap concept (kind of a new toy, I guess). This is nothing new, any good player knows about it, even before our friend David decided to give it a name and write about it.
I believe also it's about scaring pants off your opponents as the size of your stacks increases, perhaps I have misunderstood your definition. I also believe you have to choose your spots carefully, not just fire away at will, And finally, I also believe that to apply that concept correctly, you have to play in tournaments where you start with more than 1500 chips and where there are more participants, so you can use your stack without beeing pot comitted every time some moron calls you. In other words, useless in SNGs, but this gap concept thing has been discussed a couple of months ago, I don't have the thread link and I am too lazy to search it, but I remember that it was kind of a split decision.

While you can (and you must) win pots with bad cards,

You certainly must not such thing. Bad cards belong in the muck, ther are plenty of other cards, wich used wisely, can be profitable.

I knew Daniel's article, not Mike's. I must say that I believe they say the same thing I am, choose your spots.

About your play yesterday, well, you were very unlucky with your good cards, s*** happens, not much you can do about it. The restealing move was bad, I agree, but we all make mistakes, the important thing is to learn from them(I should read this everytime I do something silly /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

All in all, we agree about the general concept. I just believe you are looking for an opportunity to strike at all costs, while I am just a bit more selective about the hands I choose to get involved with.

Good reply, hope it can generate lots of responses, and we all learn something new.

William

Bozeman

02-23-2004, 04:35 PM

"It is certainly correct to be very agressive with your good hands, doing the same with garbage holdings is just gambling and showing that you are not even close to being a good player."

While almost everything you say is correct, I think that it only shows one side of the coin. On the other side is that if you always remain tight you will often be folding a good opportunity. The coin is, however, weighted. The natural tendency of the average player is to be too loose, so your points are usually correct. However, as players get better, more of them realize this, so that a) your deeper plays may work b) your basic play will be read more often.

I think the key to play is capacity to change gears.

So you need to occasionally make different plays, and this is where the psychological pandora's box is opened.

Your money comes entirely from the mistakes your opponents make. At the easy games, your opponents will make a number of zeroeth order mistakes, that is mistakes that they will make independent of your play. They will limp first in from late position, they will call with dominated hands, they will bluff when they are certain to get called, they will often fold in (or to) a great steal situation, and/or they will call a massive overbet.

As your opponents get better, though, it becomes important to induce 1st order (and higher) mistakes: if they are thinking about what you have, try to mislead them. I honestly am surprised at how little more depth than this is used, even at the highest levels of tournament play. Many WPT final tables are played on a backlot in Burbank.

Hmmm, I see that this has come out poorly; I hope you can glean the essence from this ramble.

Craig

William

02-23-2004, 04:52 PM

I agree with all you say Craig, especially with the changing gears parts. It kinds of fits in where I say that you must be selective with the hands you are agressive with.

This is a very wide subject, it is very difficult to cover all the situations and one important feature of tournament play is staying one step ahead of your opponents, as they begin to understand what you are doing. In that way you can use the image you have created to deceive them and induce more mistakes. I know you are an excellent player and these are more advanced concepts, part of everyday routine to you, but difficult to use until you have a good solid basic game.

As I have said many times, What I post is best used as a guideline. I just point the direction which I mean is the best to improve one's game, but it must also be obviuos that you can always discuss every concept separately and get really deep into the different moves and situations.

William

William

02-23-2004, 05:11 PM

William, is the semi bluffing I advocate one of the fancy plays you are talking about that get people in trouble? The reason I ask is I am trying to get a feel for how much people successfully semi bluff in these one table tournaments. I would suspect the answer would vary

Hi LB,

I haven't read your post, and I have nothing about semibluffing. I just think it has to be done with intelligence and not too often, because once you are caught, you have to rebuild your image before you can start stealing again.

ThaSaltCracka

02-23-2004, 05:30 PM

I haven't read your post, and I have nothing about semibluffing. I just think it has to be done with intelligence and not too often, because once you are caught, you have to rebuild your image before you can start stealing again.
I don't agree with that, I don't think semi-bluffs erode your image as much as straight bluffs do. I would love people to think I am betting a low-or mid pair with a draw.
Semi-bluffing makes you look like a fish, whats wrong with that?

William

02-23-2004, 05:38 PM

Semi-bluffing makes you look like a fish, whats wrong with that?

Nothing if you are playing limit ring games and know how to take advantage of it, but when you play tourneys, you look at your cards and you find TT, you will be desperately looking for your rock outfit. Trust me.

ThaSaltCracka

02-23-2004, 05:43 PM

but when you play tourneys, you look at your cards and you find TT, you will be desperately looking for your rock outfit. Trust me.
haha I see good point

William

02-23-2004, 05:54 PM

In fact, this little question explains why many players, even if it is not allowed, but you can always use your grandma's name, have 2 accounts/nicks. One for tourneys and one for ring games.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif Small test: If you never thought about this or really believed it was unthinkable, then you are not ready to be a winning poker player /images/graemlins/grin.gif

PS. Many have more than 2 nicks.... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

ThaSaltCracka

02-23-2004, 06:28 PM

what if all you play is tourneys? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

William

02-23-2004, 06:38 PM

Then you'll better harry and start playing ring games, that's where the money is in poker. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

ThaSaltCracka

02-23-2004, 06:45 PM

I should, I have started to dislike SnG, and started to enjoy multi's more, but I always like a good game of NL

CrisBrown

02-23-2004, 07:59 PM

Hi William,

[ QUOTE ]
I believe also it's about scaring pants off your opponents as the size of your stacks increases, perhaps I have misunderstood your definition. I also believe you have to choose your spots carefully, not just fire away at will, And finally, I also believe that to apply that concept correctly, you have to play in tournaments where you start with more than 1500 chips and where there are more participants, so you can use your stack without beeing pot comitted every time some moron calls you. In other words, useless in SNGs, but this gap concept thing has been discussed a couple of months ago, I don't have the thread link and I am too lazy to search it, but I remember that it was kind of a split decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the size of the gap varies with the depth of the money and, most important, the other players at the table. If they are willing to call in all of their chips on A4o, the gap is almost non-existent. At that point, you should be looking for strong heads-up hands, raising and reraising less, calling a bit more, and playing strong if the board gives you the best of it. If you're going to be all-in pre-flop, you should be looking for hands that run well hot-and-cold (e.g.: A9o is better than JTs).

But that isn't universal in SNG play, at least not at the higher buy-ins. The tighter the table, the bigger the gap, and the more you can (and will need to) win pots with iffy, marginal hands. This is especially true when the blinds and/or antes are large enough to be worth stealing. There are some caveats, though:

* Don't get involved in a big pot on bad cards. Be willing to fold your steal if reraised.
* Be aware of big stacks left to act, especially if they are playing loose.
* Be aware of very small stacks left to act, especially if they are in the blinds; your raise makes the pot much more attractive for an all-in move on a weak Ace or King.

There are two reasons to exploit the gap by stealing at a tight table. The first is that callers are likely to be on stronger hands, so in most cases your edge will be greatly diminished if they stay in a pot. The second is that they are much less likely to pay off your obvious draws. Thus, if a steal hand hits, you're more likely to get a nice pot because your improved hand will probably be well-hidden.

As with just about everything in poker, the importance of stealing, restealing, the gap concept, etc. are situational and there's no one-size-fits-all-situations answer. And I agree that you can only steal for so long; sooner or later, you will have to show down a hand, and you want it to be a winner.

BTW, isolated anecdotal example, and a (tiny) bit of a gloat. I took 2nd in a $55 SNG last week in which I had nothing BUT marginal cards to play. My biggest pocket pair for the entire tournament was TT, and I had to fold it to a raise and a reraise ahead of me. I had only one Ace-Face in the game: AJs on the very last hand. We got it all in pre-flop, he turned up A6o, and a 6 hit. *shrugs*

A lot of that 2nd place finish was avoiding trouble, as it was a loose-ish tourney until the final 6 or so. I won two decent pots getting to the final table, both on small pairs played from late position that hit for sets vs. strong Aces on A-high flops. Still, I was very short-stacked for most of the final table, which meant I stayed out of the way and stayed alive by stealing small pots when I had the chance. Once I snuck into 4th, I got lucky enough to catch 99 vs. a bigger stack's 88, and double up into a dangerous stack. I was able to steal more then, adding a bit to my stack while whittling away the 3rd and 4th stacks, folding to reraises, and generally forcing them to take the big risks.

Of the 58 SNGs I've played so far this month, I think that was the one I'm proudest of, because I had such soft cards and still managed to play my way into the money.

Cris

DougBrennan

02-23-2004, 08:58 PM

I am currently struggling with my game inthe following area, and it seems to relate to some of the discussion in this thread. I play a lot more multis than SnGs, but the question seems to fit into this discussion.

I am experimenting with ways to be more aggressive and build a larger stack earlier in the tournament, but I still waver between too tight and too loose/aggressive, with frequently disastrous results. I am aware that some of this comes from still being a work in progress, i.e. finding a style that works for me. I have had some success in building larger stacks, but frequently spend those chips firing one bullet too many at an AK that didn't hit, or something similar. A frank assessment would seem to be that I, in general, need to improve my post-flop play.

I'll try to post some specifics in the coming days, but meanwhile, does anyone have any thoughts about HOW to improve post-flop play and/or how to navigate this transition I am attempting (from tight to intellegently aggressive)?

Too general a question I know, but I'll take anything. Anecdotes, meanderings, untested theories, whatever you've got on the subject.

Thanks

Doug

"and we are merely players."

DrPhysic

02-23-2004, 10:16 PM

Will you guys start drawing a line around your posts......

so they will fit in the frames better?

Great post. Great thread. Again, a complete thread saved to hd and printed to be re-read more than once.

Only comment is with reference to my most recent reading: Both TPFAP and Zen and the Art of Poker are very relevant to this thread. (or it to the books.)

Doc

thomastem

02-24-2004, 12:52 AM

Doug,

I don't have the experience some of the other posters have but this might help.

It depends on your opponents. You can't just be aggresive and you can't just wait for Aces and Kings. Too tight you get blinded to death and when you do come everyone runs for the hills. Too loose and 1 of your opponents will hammer you. I think proper strategy is a constant adjustment in play to your opponents, Blind limits, images of yourself and opponents. In tourneys this changes as opponents come and go, stacks change, and stakes change.

I guess my advice is to play your situation in the most profitable way and remember that like the cards you are dealt you can't control your opponents styles and table situations.

Good luck

xtravistx

02-24-2004, 05:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my advice is to play your situation in the most profitable way

[/ QUOTE ]

Any tips on what the most profitable way is other than "it depends?". Obviously we all want to play in the most profitable way.

-xtravistx

Myrtle

02-24-2004, 09:12 AM

Doug,

Try this thought on for size........

Instead of looking at your game from a global perspective, look at it from the following "elemental" perspective.....

"Make the best decision you can on each & every play"

When you think about the difference of the above two concepts, does that change your perspective at all?

Yesterday

02-24-2004, 11:26 AM

Poker is a situational game.

I don’t worry about concepts and theories too much. I worry about playing solid poker. Most importantly you HAVE to play position in any tourney, this is the difference between the winner’s and the loser’s.

I play tight-aggressive, but I have to get away from that at times and start pounding the weak players.

Steal from the mid-stacked players, they are more concerned with not losing any chips and waiting for a big pocket pair. Don’t steal from the table low unless you think you can because he is liable to go all-in against ya, same with the chip leader, he might call your raises with drawing hands and out-play/draw you.

Biggest thing, Poker is a game of information aquired. Play every hand based on information you have gained to this point. A guy is super aggressive and you know he will bet. Then check-raise him and see how he deals with that, or play out your second/third pair if you think he is trying to steal the pot with position betting.

Your in late position, folded to you. Raise or Fold, simple as that. Don’t call unless you care slow-playing. Which isn’t bad at the late stages of a tourney because people become desperate with there mediocre holdings.
Stay away from drawing hands that will cost you a lot. Put more emphases on pairs late because this will be the difference between winners and losers.

When you get heads up. Slow-play a lot. Don’t check the river with any intention of check-raising. Heads up, this rarely works.

My theory on tourney’s....any suggestions?????

Yesterday

Pitcher

02-24-2004, 01:56 PM

Hi William,

I have not read all the reply's, but being more patient and logical has made me go from being a small loser to a consistent winner. Yesterday I lost like crazy on Poker Stars (won for the day overall because of good day at Party Poker) and it was ALL due to lack of patience. I normally NEVER do this anymore. Now that I have done it, I will address it with myself again.

I tend to post issues that have little to do with specific hands and much to do with emotional hold / control. Poker is about betting big with your big hands and getting out of your others. Everything else is gravy (not to say that tournament strategy, reading players, Gap Concept, avoiding coinflips, blind stealing, disguising the strength of your hand, etc. is not important). If you get this one thing right you will probably win, plain and simple. To win, you must be patient enough and emotionally consistent enough to do this. These are the "skills" that differentiate winners from losers.

So how do you go about doing this. First, keep a poker journal. Everytime you make a bonehead play from impatience / on tilt / having a bad day / whatever, WRITE IT DOWN. Then go back and look at your journal and it is amazing that you have fewer and fewer entries regarding these issues. Another thing you should do BEFORE you play is read some set of instructions about how you are going to play. Mine is very simple and I will share it. It works for me:

1. Play tight
2. SLOWLY and carefully evaluate all all-ins and big re-raises
3. Respect the game and the other players. (this sentence is a codeword for do not become arrogant, do not make snap judgements about players, do not MISJUDGE other players' play etc.)
4. Watch your tendency to be overaggressive with less than premium hands.
5. Do not tilt over bad beats (very hard for me!!!)

Reminding myself of these things over and over helps. You think you somehow get over having to go over these basics, but YOU DON'T.

I was a very good college tennis player and it taught me something....RESPECT THE BASICS. In tennis, that is footwork. You must periodically look at how you move your feet to be a solid consistent winner in tennis. If your game goes into a slump, it is almost always footwork. If you are playing super well...probably it is because your footwork is very solid.
Poker is no different.

Finally, I want to give a piece of advice about what to read. (Note: This is NOT a paid endorsement for John Vorhuas, I have never met the man, but I do owe him a big favor for helping me become a winning poker player)
If you have not read Killer Poker and Killer Poker Online you are making a big mistake. These books are not about tactics or tournament strategy. They describe how to get right in your head. If you implement what he says YOU WILL WIN. I have read and studied many other books and especially like Theory of Poker, HEFAP, and TPFAD by Sklansky. They can tell you how to play .... all the strategy and tactics you need.... but they don't tell you what you need to do to win...which is control your emotional state. Everything else pales in comparison to this one thing.

Thanks for the excellent post on this much neglected subject.

Pitcher

Yesterday

02-24-2004, 02:09 PM

you had to have read my post before you posted because I made a few references to Killer Poker.

That is my read on you

how was my read, good or bad??? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Pitcher

02-24-2004, 02:20 PM

Bad,

But now I will read all the posts.... hehe.

Pitcher

Ulysses

02-24-2004, 02:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
my first race hand of the day (AJs in BB vs. all-in by very short-stacked SB) had such absurd results (I hit A and J on the flop, but he hit a set on the river).

[/ QUOTE ]

Cris, (I think you said he had 99 on this one) had the flop come 922 and then the turn Ace, river Jack, would you have felt differently about this hand?

Consider that. I think it might help your general mindset in dealing w/ these types of hands. From reading some of your posts, I think that might help you in the latter parts of both tournaments and playing sessions.

CrisBrown

02-24-2004, 03:13 PM

Hi Pitcher,

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is about betting big with your big hands and getting out of your others. Everything else is gravy (not to say that tournament strategy, reading players, Gap Concept, avoiding coinflips, blind stealing, disguising the strength of your hand, etc. is not important). If you get this one thing right you will probably win, plain and simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to beat a dead horse -- okay, it's not dead yet, so let me beat it again a few times -- there is no one-size-fits-all advice, and the above, while generally correct, cannot be applied mechanically. It works if and only if: (a) you get big hands to play; and, (b) your opponents pay you off when you do.

And while you can't predict the former, you can (to some extent) predict the latter. If you're at a table where players won't pay off a big hand -- they fold to raises or reraises, and check down whenever a draw looks to be on board -- you'll have to find another way to win.

Cris

thomastem

02-24-2004, 03:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess my advice is to play your situation in the most profitable way

[/ QUOTE ]

Any tips on what the most profitable way is other than "it depends?". Obviously we all want to play in the most profitable way.

-xtravistx

[/ QUOTE ]

Xtra,

My point is that if the table is too tight you can profit with stealing blinds a LITTLE more often and if the table is too loose you profit by waiting for premium hands and in the course of a tournament you have to usually use both at the right time rather than being just a rock or just a stealer.

Pitcher

02-24-2004, 03:57 PM

Hi Cris,

My intention was not to give blanket advice but to detail how I go about playing solid poker. Until a player masters and IMPLEMENTS the concept of playing only good or premium cards nearly all the time they won't win. Nearly means nearly, not every time. Of course, what you say about the need to play other than optimal hands is true. The post was not about when to play other than optimal hands, but about developing the discipline needed to play optimal hands and not play many speculative / marginal hands.

Pitcher

William

02-24-2004, 04:18 PM

Not to beat a dead horse -- okay, it's not dead yet, so let me beat it again a few times

Cris, I think your arm will get tired before the horse is dead. The whip is of poor quality and the horse is a pure blood arabian stallion /images/graemlins/grin.gif

It is true that there is not a one fits all magic coat, but there is a correct way of analizing things and a solid basis to stand on. When you (you general, not you Cris) have acquired that, you can start getting fancy.

First you crawl, then you walk, then you learn how to ride a bike, then how to drive a car, and eventually if you are a bad driver, they take your driver's license away (in poker you loose your money)

Advocating that patience is not one of the basis of winning poker is just wrong. No matter wich playing style you prefer.

CrisBrown

02-24-2004, 05:45 PM

Hi William and Pitcher,

Frankly, if anyone doesn't already know that in general they need to wait for good cards or good opportunities, then they should get another hobby, because they'll never have a chance at this one.

That having been said, blanket statements like "if your image is not that of a solid player, then it's only a matter of time before you will be on the rail," or "poker is about betting big with your big hands and folding the rest" have so many exceptions that their general utility is just about zero.

I could as easily say "poker is 100% about winning more on the hands you win than you lose on the rest." Well, sure, but so what?

When y'all stop giving generalities without caveats, I'll stop mentioning the caveats.

Cris

William

02-24-2004, 06:37 PM

Hi Cris,

Frankly, if anyone doesn't already know that in general they need to wait for good cards or good opportunities, then they should get another hobby, because they'll never have a chance at this one.

Couldn't agree more.

When y'all stop giving generalities without caveats, I'll stop mentioning the caveats.

It is my impression that the largest crowd of SNGs players are not experienced players and I know also that when I started playing poker, I got suddenly to know about a lot of situations, moves, styles, everybody is telling you to do this or that, and even if you get a lot of advice, you are very confused.
So, I thought, for a change, I would start with the generalities, that way it would allow less experienced players to build a solid foundation and they could move on from there.

I know that it can be boring at first, to master the basics, and that it is cooler to consider yourself as a gifted player, skip all the introductions and start with the fancy moves. I agree that it is much more exciting to bluff half the table than to wait for AA, but I also think it is the wrong way to proceed.
I am sure that you too, would benefit of the boring but efficient method of "moving forward one step at the time"

Take care,
William

ThaSaltCracka

02-24-2004, 06:44 PM

I'm so glad you two are on speaking terms again /images/graemlins/grin.gif

PrayingMantis

02-24-2004, 06:48 PM

If I may, I want to add one thought to this thread. And it's not that I want to say William is right and Cris isn't. Because it's obvious that you essentially agree, if I understand right, on the basic concepts.

However, after playing very intensely for the last few months (my first few months), I can say without hesitation, that if I regret something (usualy after a loss), is playing *too many hands* and not *too few* (or how do you say it?). This may sound a bit obvious, but mistakes usualy happen, with me at least, when I decide to play a hand I should have folded, and not vice-versa (yes, I know that after you fold there's no chance for a mistake... /images/graemlins/grin.gif). To put it differently: I very rarely regret folding anything.

Only my 2 cents contribution to this discussion,

PrayingMantis

William

02-24-2004, 06:54 PM

Very well said, PM,

Lee Jones says in his excellent book, Winning Low Limit HE,

ALWAYS LOOK FOR A REASON TO FOLD

He repeats it several times.

ThaSaltCracka

02-24-2004, 07:14 PM

To put it differently: I very rarely regret folding anything.
I love this line, I should have it tatooed on my arm

Pitcher

02-24-2004, 09:37 PM

Hi There,

Cris, somehow I have gotten involved in the William vs. Cris dispute and I really don't like it. However, my post concerned discipline and control. I didn't think any players here need to be told that playing good cards is better than playing bad cards, but many struggle with the discipline needed to do it. Most players, as Praying Mantis pointed out, make the mistake of playing too many hands. I also do it which is why I am constantly reminding myself to play solid poker. I was providing methods that work for me and allow me to do that. These methods have worked for many players and John Vorhaus, who suggests many of the things I mentioned, has written two excellent books about these issues. You probably journal your play and I know you use Poker Tracker to analyze and correct deficiencies. What I am suggesting is similar with regard to discipline.

You seem to have a need to read something further into it. I do not expect every post I make to dissected like I am in a court trial.
As for generalities, that is all there are. This thread was not about analyzing specific hands where all kinds of specifics are involved. So, in general, play your good and premium hands hard and get away from everything else. "It depends" covers pretty much everything else unless speaking of specific hands. Even then, generalities frequently suffice because there may be several ways to play a specific hand (assuming imperfect knowledge).

Pitcher

triplc

02-24-2004, 10:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
To put it differently: I very rarely regret folding anything.
I love this line, I should have it tatooed on my arm

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to disagree a bit with this one, although it is certainly more pertinent in NLHE than in LL simply because not folding a hand can cost you all of your chips. I, too, get in lots of trouble sometimes when I take a flyer on hands like KTs and the flop comes Kxx, or T rag rag and run into overpairs or a better kicker, and I think to myself "should've mucked it preflop".

However, that statement needs to be qualified somewhat doesn't it? I had one SnG where the cards were just awful and I played them so timidly I got blinded right out of it. Afterwards, I must say that I regretted folding as often as I did because I needed to steal some blinds with some marginal hand, and didn't. When the cards are cold, you need to get "lucky" with some lousy cards to place, don't you?

CCC