200+15 SNG players-how good is this guy?

[Profit]

The past 3 days i've been watching $200 sng tables to watch how ppl play on the bubble (i'm far from $200 level btw) While i was just randomly going from game to game with 4 ppl in them, i noticed a player " Frozen_Fish " in several of these and was playing fearlessly. He Definately plays the player and their stack rather than his cards when down to 4-5 ppl. With that said, i've never seen him called with absolute rags and if he is behind it's not by much. Then when his opponents seem to think he is buying pots off their blinds he has a monster. His strategy seems not to settle for 3rd but definately to position himself for first place with 4-5 players sometimes without regard to lowstacks (for example one time he was 2nd in chips and went all in with chip leader in BB when button who folded only had 290 chips).

I've watched about 12-15 of his SNG's the past 2 days, while he doesnt win them all, he sure is making a nice profit in the ones i see.

Also i notice he plays the 50's during the day. 200 competetion i'm guessing isn't as good during the day?

Anyways, i'm curious as to what ppl who play against him think of him, perhaps he is even 2+2, but i couldnt find him in a search.

Also, i would like to watch some of you at the 200 level sometime, if you could post or pm ur party username i would like to watch.

thanks.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
The past 3 days i've been watching $200 sng tables to watch how ppl play on the bubble (i'm far from $200 level btw) While i was just randomly going from game to game with 4 ppl in them, i noticed a player " Frozen_Fish " in several of these and was playing fearlessly. He Definately plays the player and their stack rather than his cards when down to 4-5 ppl. With that said, i've never seen him called with absolute rags and if he is behind it's not by much. Then when his opponents seem to think he is buying pots off their blinds he has a monster. His strategy seems not to settle for 3rd but definately to position himself for first place with 4-5 players sometimes without regard to lowstacks (for example one time he was 2nd in chips and went all in with chip leader in BB when button who folded only had 290 chips).

I've watched about 12-15 of his SNG's the past 2 days, while he doesnt win them all, he sure is making a nice profit in the ones i see.

Also i notice he plays the 50's during the day. 200 competetion i'm guessing isn't as good during the day?

Anyways, i'm curious as to what ppl who play against him think of him, perhaps he is even 2+2, but i couldnt find him in a search.

Also, i would like to watch some of you at the 200 level sometime, if you could post or pm ur party username i would like to watch.

thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is consistently at or near the top of the leaderboard. That's got to count for something.

eastbay

[AtlBrvs4Life]

Frozen_Fish seems to be an excellent player. I have a link to some of his hand histories for the $200 SNGs if anyone wants to take a look.

[La Brujita]

I believe Frozen Fish is our very own Frozen, so you can just ask him yourself how good he is /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe Frozen Fish is our very own Frozen, so you can just ask him yourself how good he is

[/ QUOTE ]

He is, and He is.

[Frozen]

Thanx! I'm truly flattered.

The reason 'I' have been playing the $50's during the day is because I'm training a close family member how to play.
These $50's are his training excercise under my light supervision.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanx! I'm truly flattered.

The reason 'I' have been playing the $50's during the day is because I'm training a close family member how to play.
These $50's are his training excercise under my light supervision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Frozen, i need some training exercise in the $50s with light supervision. better yet, i need some at the $10s, $20s, and $30s too. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

*Desdia72- future $200 + $15 player in training, hopefully /images/graemlins/grin.gif*

[LethalRose]

Frozen is a very good player...I watch him quite a lot since I rarely have the bankroll to play...college is expensive..

spyhard_spb is also a very good player you might want to watch, one interesting thing about him is he always sits in the same position in every SNG he plays in.

to Frozen:
Im a relatively new player..Id be interested in hearing what books you recommend, post here or send me a pm if you have the time to make a list..I want to become a serious player so i know i need to read some books. I also have a very limited bankroll so any advice you have on that would be good. (I can play with $50..every other week or so) I seem to lose the $50 in about a week..I play the $5 SNG's i know thats too high for my bankroll so im going to move down to the .5 / $1 games next time. Still any advice would be appreciated.

[Frozen]

Hi LethalRose,

I'd suggest you stick to the 2+2 books, mainly Sklansky.

First, read this one:

Hold 'Em Poker
by David Sklansky

Next, read:

Hold'Em Poker for Advanced Players
by David Sklansky, Mason Malmuth

For tournaments: Tournament poker for advanced players (Sklansky)

For Omaha/8: High Low split Poker for Advanced players (Ray Zee)

If I'm already mentioning books, I gotta plug my all time favorite here: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I got into her philosophy after noticing that every single highly successful person I'd meet just happened to also be devoted to Rand's philosophy. Just like communism/collectivism is magnet philosophy for bums & losers, Objectivism/Capitalism is a magnet philosophy for highly successful & self-sufficient individuals.

Good luck (Even though everybody's luck is quite equal in the long term)...


~Frozen Fish

[MaqEvil]

I second all of Frozen's book reccommendations. I'm 80% of the way through Atlas Shrugged and it's a great book, I read about 600 pages in one sitting the other day. Also, don't forget Theory Of Poker, I think it's good to read that one after some digestion of the concepts in HEFAP.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm already mentioning books, I gotta plug my all time favorite here: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I got into her philosophy after noticing that every single highly successful person I'd meet just happened to also be devoted to Rand's philosophy. Just like communism/collectivism is magnet philosophy for bums & losers, Objectivism/Capitalism is a magnet philosophy for highly successful & self-sufficient individuals.


[/ QUOTE ]

While I love Atlas Shrugged, just a warning that Ayn Rand is quite verbose, and you are in for an over 1000 page monstrosity including 80 pages of one person giving a speech about the same....things..........again.............and..... ....................again. I agree with most of what she says, but be prepared to be reading for quite awhile...

[dm34]

Agreed about Rand. I have only read the Fountainhead so far, which I enjoyed, but she has a tendency to be repeat herself - a lot.

[Abagadro]

I prefer The Fountainhead. Gail Wynand (sp?) is one of my favorite literary characters of all time as I identify with him a lot (even though Roarke is the purported hero of the tale). I have watched with interest as modern day Ellsworth Tooey's have risen to prominence in the media.

Atlas Shrugged is too didactic for my taste.

[Profit]

well i'm watching the "trainee" right now and he was putting on a clinic until the last few hands. I've noticed you rarely "flash" ur cards but this "trainee" is doing it often. Any reason for that? Thanks

[Frozen]

[ QUOTE ]
well i'm watching the "trainee" right now and he was putting on a clinic until the last few hands. I've noticed you rarely "flash" ur cards but this "trainee" is doing it often. Any reason for that? Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope he gets over that!

[MaqEvil]

[ QUOTE ]
just a warning that Ayn Rand is quite verbose, and you are in for an over 1000 page monstrosity including 80 pages of one person giving a speech about the same....things..........again.............and..... ....................again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I just read her 80 page rant, it could definately be more effective as a 5-10 page rant, especially considering that 99% of it is just her overtly stating the theme of the book. Good book, just finished it. Cut into my poker time this week though.

[Frozen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just a warning that Ayn Rand is quite verbose, and you are in for an over 1000 page monstrosity including 80 pages of one person giving a speech about the same....things..........again.............and..... ....................again.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, it is unfair to compare Rand's litterary style to interesting, fast moving but reletively 'empty' works of fiction (Stephen King, Sydney Sheldon, Salinger, etc...)

Instead please compare her works to the dry-ass pure philosophy texts of Aristotle, Socrates, Nietzsche, Descartes and the like.

[TheGrifter]

I find the comparison of Ayn Rand to Nietzsche to be patently disgusting.

[Cptkernow]

Dont want to go off topic here but from a technical point of view Marxism by definition is objectivism due to heavy influence of Hegel over Marxism. The borrowed concept being Objective historical process.
No biggy.

Cpt Kernow.

P.S. I understand Marxism and Capatilism very well. Thats why I am an anarchist.

[nicky g]

Why?

[Sam T.]

[ QUOTE ]
I find the comparison of Ayn Rand to Nietzsche to be patently disgusting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel the same way about Salinger and Sheldon. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Cptkernow]

Why ?

[nicky g]

"Why?"

I call blatant plagiarism of my post /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Cptkernow]

You got there nano seconds before me.

I can see no reason for the disgust appart from the mistaken idea that Nietzche is some how associated with the Nazi's.

If anything Nietzches ideas are expressed more by radical free market or libertarian perspectives, as Nietzche is/was a rampant individualist who would have hated the Nazi with a quite considerable passion.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm already mentioning books, I gotta plug my all time favorite here: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I got into her philosophy after noticing that every single highly successful person I'd meet just happened to also be devoted to Rand's philosophy. Just like communism/collectivism is magnet philosophy for bums & losers, Objectivism/Capitalism is a magnet philosophy for highly successful & self-sufficient individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think one needs to be careful not to confuse cause and effect here. It's not that following Ayn Rand tends to make you successful. It's that people who are already successful, or on the road to success, tend to be drawn to this philosophy because it justifies their way of life.

There's nothing wrong with this, any more than it's wrong for a beggar to be pro-welfare. But he's more likely to be pro-welfare because he's a beggar, than the other way around.

[nicky g]

Yeah but you copied my post word for word and said it in the exact same tone of voice as me.

I agree with your points on Nietzsche.

[Cptkernow]

To plagarize your post I would have had to have seen it.

[nicky g]

Sorry, I thought you realised I was joking.

[Cptkernow]

Vot is this "Joking"

[nicky g]

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Cptkernow]

/images/graemlins/ooo.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif /images/graemlins/frown.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/crazy.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif /images/graemlins/shocked.gif /images/graemlins/smirk.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/wink.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

I am nothing if not ambiguos.

[NNH]

If you don't mind me asking Frozen, what part of Chicago are you from? I'm in Cicero. Any other 2+2ers that you know of in Chicagoland area? Sorry it's off-topic.

[Profit]

this post got hijacked long ago, i dont think anything is off topic

[Bozeman]

FWIW (not much), Frozen_Fish is down $810 in 14 $215 SnG's I have played against him.

[Frozen]

[ QUOTE ]
You got there nano seconds before me.

I can see no reason for the disgust appart from the mistaken idea that Nietzche is some how associated with the Nazi's.

If anything Nietzches ideas are expressed more by radical free market or libertarian perspectives, as Nietzche is/was a rampant individualist who would have hated the Nazi with a quite considerable passion.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very educated post. I too was under the misconception that Nietzche's 'superman' ideal was somehow a foundation for the Nazi racism, until a Nietzcheist set me straight a few years ago. I have seen no evidence that Nietzche advocated racism in the slightest.

[Frozen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I'm already mentioning books, I gotta plug my all time favorite here: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I got into her philosophy after noticing that every single highly successful person I'd meet just happened to also be devoted to Rand's philosophy. Just like communism/collectivism is magnet philosophy for bums & losers, Objectivism/Capitalism is a magnet philosophy for highly successful & self-sufficient individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think one needs to be careful not to confuse cause and effect here. It's not that following Ayn Rand tends to make you successful. It's that people who are already successful, or on the road to success, tend to be drawn to this philosophy because it justifies their way of life.

There's nothing wrong with this, any more than it's wrong for a beggar to be pro-welfare. But he's more likely to be pro-welfare because he's a beggar, than the other way around.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, good point... but wouldn't a child raised on Objectivist ideals be more likely to achieve wealth than a child raised by egalitarianist parents & teachers? I say yes.

[Frozen]

South Barrington, but I grew up in Israel, including 3 years in the IDF. I'm still in Israel part-time.

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, good point... but wouldn't a child raised on Objectivist ideals be more likely to achieve wealth than a child raised by egalitarianist parents & teachers? I say yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you keep score by how much wealth your child achieves, possibly. Personally I'd be more proud to raise a child who thinks for himself.

[Abagadro]

If I raised a little Dagney Taggart, I consider myself a serious failure as a parent. Objectivism is as cockeyed as Communism and just as rediculously utopian.

[Frozen]

[ QUOTE ]
If I raised a little Dagney Taggart, I consider myself a serious failure as a parent. Objectivism is as cockeyed as Communism and just as rediculously utopian.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting that you would feel this way. Care to elaborate?

[Abagadro]

I don't know if I am qualified at this point. I used to be very into Objectivism 10 years ago, but came to realize that it's basically anti-social and selfish. I think it has some great ideas and its best form is actually found in the Fountainhead with the character of Howard Roarke and his belief in himself and refusal to compromise his own vision, but gets taken way too extreme with all of Galt's socio-economic nonesense. It's been far too long since I have been into it for me to discuss specifics, I just have the residual rejection of its prinicples as a former convert. At the bottom line, I think it is like all pure philosphies, ultimately unable to be practiced without dire consequences to the social fabric.

[Frozen]

Of course we are selfish and anti-social! But we are far more inclined to just live and let live than most others.

"The 'common good' of a collective, a race, a class, a state was the claim and justification of every tyranny ever established over men. ....Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for mankind ends with a sea of blood. It goes on and will go on so long as men believe that an action is good if it is unselfish. That permits the altruist to act and forces his victims to bear it. The leaders of collectivist movements ask nothing for themselves. But observe the results."
'Howard Roark' in Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead.

[Abagadro]

You have to read Rand with the background of the society she came out of when the "collective good" was used as an excuse for an authoritarian and murderous regime, so I take most of that with a big grain of salt. What bugs be about Objectivism now is that it ignores the nature of society. I'm sorry that neither you nor I could go live in the mountains on our piles of gold. I would if I could, but it's just not realistic.

I like aspects of Roarke's individualism, but if you try to create public policy based upon it, you essentially have social darwinism which didn't work out to well in my opinion when it was tried here any more than Communism worked out in the Soviet Union.

[SmileyEH]

The best arguement against objectivism I can develop is the real world applications of its principles. Ayn Rand herself felt that all taxation of individuals and corporations was inherently immortal. This violates pretty basic economic principles for goods/services which have a cost that is unable to be set by supply & demand interaction. I am thinking of the cost of defense for example -- Ayn Rand supported a strong central gov't responsible for law enforcement, foreign policy, and national defence -- it is impossible for a price to be set per person or corporation on any of these services the gov't supplies. Her idea that capitalism is a perfect system for all situations is "objectively" wrong.

Applying Objectivism to everyday life -- which Rand and her early followers attempted to do around the time of Atlas Shrugged publication (Alan Greenspan, Barbara Branden, Nathaniel Branden, Leonard...drawing a blank here etc.) -- turned out to be a complete failure. I can only point you to the life of Ayn Rand as described in her two unathourized biographies (by the now estranged Barbara and Nathaniel Branden). It is obvious that the credibility of these two sources could be in question as they were both former disciples of Rand's philosophies, and in the case of Nathaniel a former lover. However, as the two seperate and uncollaborated books have little dissagreement I find their tale ultimately believable and disturbing. Rand was eventually driven insane by her need to have rational explanations for all behaviour, decisions, and ideas. A grand idea, but only a pipe dream. What resulted was a woman who nearly destroyed the lives of several young people by convincing them they were immoral human beings (in her philosophy no longer true humans) because of their irrational behavior.

Reading The Fountainhead changed my life. It opened up new ideas and principles (selfishness, inate good of humanity, rational thought etc.) that I still hold true to this day. But they are just that: ideas...their application to the real world in their true form is just as destructive as the ideals of collective good applied in Atlas Shrugged.

-SmileyEH