Poker Goals Pt. 2

[AleoMagus]

On the contrary, I have found this thread highly educational. I think true newbies (to the game, not 2+2) should read this thread carefully.

As far as being a dean, William is doing just that. He's been a bit ruthless, but we should consider why he felt it so imperative to say anything at all.

Chris, I don't know you. I hope you keep posting. If I could put my two cents in, then here goes (and hey, why not - if you guys think this is a private conversation, go do it with PMs). I don't think you are immodest, and I don't think humility is the problem with your posts. I think it is that you are a good writer and you can be persuasive. When less than entirely certain or informed about something, this persuasiveness can be a bad thing. I remember a thread once where your point was countered and a poster responded with "No, listen to Chris" and went on to adopt the counter argument, as if you had made it.

I suppose it is good that they understood what was being said (lets hope so, anyways), but it was odd that the assumption was that you were right. Are people even reading posts here anymore, or are they just looking at who is doing the posting when they decide who is correct, and what to listen to.

This is not a game with little at stake. We are talking about money here, and often, more than anyone can afford to lose. This is not something to be trite about.

I have no problem with anyone's attitude, however ridiculous or incredible - so long as they are the ones asking questions. When less than credible personalities start answering questions in very persuasive ways, we should start to worry.

For those of you who have benifited from Chris' posts (and I have no doubt that there are many), I think that is great. I simply caution accepting everything as immediate fact. In fact I make this same caution about my own posts, Williams posts... heck, even Sklansky's books.

If you really want to learn about this game, work through every argument and decide for yourself. And Play, and play and play.

Sorry to step into the fire... Really

Regards,
Brad S

[CrisBrown]

Hiya Brad,

Being a persuasive writer is a two-edged sword, and that's a good thing IMO. If I am persuasive, it is because I not only state a conclusion, but also my reasoning, in as clear and precise a way as I can. So, if there are flaws in my reasoning, they are out there for everyone to see and pick apart. By contrast, simply stating conclusions without any reasoning leaves one with no other options buts "You're right" or "You're wrong."

I have never claimed to be an expert. I don't post the stakes I play to boast or to garner greater respect, but to qualify my responses. As I wrote in the +EV thread, the optimal risk-reward strategy varies with the structure and the table dynamics. What works for me, with the two-table SNG structure at PokerStars, and the typical table dynamic of the mid-level buy-ins, may be disasterous at an $11 SNG on Party. So readers who play $11 SNGs on Party should be ignoring a lot of what I say, not because it's "wrong" but because it would probably be wrong for them.

If I am to be derided for trying to make my reasoning as clear and precise as possible, if it is better that I should be fuzzy-brained and waffle so no one will put too much stock in what I say ... well ... then this isn't the right forum for me.

Cris

[rusty JEDI]

I know many of you wish this thread to die, but i really feel the need to post. (sorry i just read it for the first time as i have been away)

I know many many not think its about who is right or who is wrong but in life almost are things are. I think that William has made an extremely valuable point. From what i understand he had been posting replies to previous threads in regards to the errors he sees chris making (his opinion), and in reality he is trying to help. But, Chris continually just passed it off instead of really taking the chance to reflect upon what william is saying. And in an attempt to get his point across he got a little aggressive, but in this case it was likely needed.

Same paragraph but i needed a line break for visual appeal. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] The thing that makes me feel that Chris is simply passing it off is shown below when she (didnt know it was a she until a kurn post) finally decides to show a sample of some losses. The interesting part is she put up 4 examples, only 3 were losses and in each one she put up an excuse of being cold decked or the cold wave continues. My god, have you never lost because you never made an actual mistake. A bankroll of only $2500 and you only lose when you are "cold decked," you cant possibly be cold decked over half the time. Even if you were truly cold decked 50% of the time because it is the only example of a loss you gave you should have a much bigger bankroll than $2500.

I really dont mean to pick sides personally and i will not. I think that Chris is a valuable poster but in a search to improve you really must look into what William is saying. He is an extremely gifted player, just check the KOTZ finishes.



[ QUOTE ]
Hi All,

Like this:

$55 SNG (no $109s available) -- cold-decked and with only 9xBB left, I push in from the SB on 77. BB has AK. Out 12th.

$55 SNG (still no $109s) -- Out 3rd on A5 vs. KQ. Only money finish of the day (so far), and that only because my short-stacked 33 all-in caught quads to take out JJ.

$215 SNG (STILL no $109s) -- Cold wave, cont'd. Hanging around 1500 but blinds are now 100/200 and I get QQ in the BB. UTG with ~3300 min-raises. Short stack moves in for 450. I move in. UTG calls. UTG has AA. Short stack has 44 and hits 4 on the flop. Out 12th.

$109 SNG (finally) -- Cold wave, cont'd. Short-stacked and out 11th on AQ vs. AT. He catches the 10. Buh-bye.

Three of four hands I was ahead when the money went in, albeit by coin-flips on the 77 vs. AK and A5 vs. KQ. The AQ was the first Ace I'd seen in the tourney, and dominant vs. AT, but dominant hands lose sometimes. The QQ hand, I had 7xBB left and this was the first pair I'd seen (and only one Ace). If UTG has AA -- and he did -- oh well.

That's life.

Cris -- who wonders what is gained by such posts

[/ QUOTE ]

[CrisBrown]

Hiya rusty,

Take it for what you will. In those tournaments earlier today, I averaged 6% of flops seen. Cold waves do happen, and all you can do is ride them out and hope to catch the right hand and not get outdrawn when desperation time gets there. I had good hands when desperation time came, but I ran into a better hand once, and got outdrawn on the others.

Oh well.

That happens to everyone.

William's point was that I never talk about my losses. Well, I had some losses today. So I talk about the, and I get derided for not thinking William's way (whatever that might be) about how I lost. Well, I know how I lost. You can't make chicken soup out of chicken poop, and some days all you get is chicken poop.

T.J. Cloutier says that a good player will make money anytime he/she gets just an even break from the cards. I think I do that. I don't need the deck to run me over in order to win. I do, however, need more than 6% of flops, because of the structure and quality of play at PokerStars.

For the record, I folded only two would-have-been-winners today: QJs UTG when the flop came K-T-9 of my suit, and J7s on the button vs. a 3xBB raise when the flop came T-8-9. The rest of those hands folded would have lost, and would have been dead if I'd reraised pre-flop on a steal. Today, the cards just weren't there. Tomorrow they may be. That, as they say, is why they call it gambling and not banking.

Cris

[La Brujita]

I am going to jump in here even though maybe I should not. The reason I am going to give my comments is that I care about this forum and I take playing 1 table tournaments incredibly seriously. This forum has helped me along tremendously. What I am about to write is not about any personal agenda but basically about the betterment of the forum.

Here are my starting thoughts:

I have played a bit with William and he is an extremely good player. I think his posts are very very valuable and I am a big fan of his.

I have not played with Cris often but I think her posts are helpful and she is a credit to this board in that she is willing to post responses to everyone's questions.

All that being said, IMO Cris has generally given the impression that she is a 1 table expert. I quote the following from a post about winning percentage in sit and gos from her:

"Hi Pitcher,

My target is 60-65% at PokerStars' $55 and $109 SNGs. By and large I'm close to that target, though of course there are weeks where I couldn't win if I were the only one at the table. I don't play all that many, though, as I just don't have the time. (Poker is my second job, and I also have a partner and kids and other interests.) So in a typical week, I'll probably play maybe 8-10 SNGs, and money in 4-6 of those. I did much better when I was starting at PokerStars because I was playing $11 and $22 SNGs to build my bankroll. A money rate of 70% was comparatively easy at the lower buy-ins; it's just not possible at $55 and $109.

I aim for $500/week net -- a decent second income -- but again, that's a goal and some weeks don't work out that way. Oh well. Live, learn, improve...."

Further she says,

"Hiya Kurn,

My money breakdown is roughly 30/15/30/25 ... or basically an even split except that when it gets down to heads-up I'm going to win more often than not."

These posts were made in the last two weeks or so. The reason this is important is that someone reading all of her advice might think that everything she says if basically gospel. Now not everything anyone says (even Greg or William) is gospel because poker is so situation dependant. That being said, credibility and experience is key to deciding how/how much to value a poster's thoughts. We all massage the truth a bit but I think William's point may partly be that Cris plays up her abilities and gets credibility as a result which her advice may or may not warrant.

I have no idea if that is the case, and William, even though I am a huge fan, I think your tone could and should have been a bit gentler.

But I am a solid player and am sometimes slightly bothered by the certainty suggested by some of Cris' posts. I was slightly bothered when she told me it was not Pokerstars fault that I had a short stack when they delayed the game for 1 hour and bumped the blinds up 3 levels, when that was really not the point of my post. I also think she was wrong in her analysis of the flush draw hand we played together (especially in a tourney setting where you are facing some dead money, not talking about the 2+2'ers just talking in general), although two reasonable people may disagree. Do I want her to stop posting? No, I want her to post more, I think she generally gives very good advice and is one of the most important members of this forum. But I think we should all realize that none of us have this game of poker figured out.

[Kinli]

[ QUOTE ]
finally decides to show a sample of some losses. The interesting part is she put up 4 examples, only 3 were losses and in each one she put up an excuse of being cold decked or the cold wave continues. My god, have you never lost because you never made an actual mistake. A bankroll of only $2500 and you only lose when you are "cold decked," you cant possibly be cold decked over half the time. Even if you were truly cold decked 50% of the time because it is the only example of a loss you gave you should have a much bigger bankroll than $2500.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rusty,

It's interesting that you draw on a single post to make a general conclusion. Cold waves do happen. I've been through them. The pros say they can sometimes go on for as long as six months. It's a time when you get few decent hands, and the ones you do get are most often outdrawn. Sorta like the time I lost with a flush to a straight flush. That was in the midst of a three-week cold wave. Yeah, I won once or twice, once, to my amazement, after having only had three winning hands before the heads-up.

The point is, Cris was frustrated that day. I watched her play. When you have to fold 95% you start to get frustrated. When your good hands are always called and outdrawn, you get frustrated.

But if you've been reading this forum for a while, you'll realize these are not the only losing hands Cris has posted. What's more, I've listened to her say, "I played that game/hand badly." "I made a mistake." "I shouldn't have done that." Elsewhere, just recently, she posted about her tendency to go on tilt when she loses. How much more honest can you get? If she wanted to lie about her skills, why not tell everyone she's won $25,000?

She's extremely critical of her own play, and she doesn't think she's an expert. Funny how stating her opinions and thoughts here seem to have created a different feeling in others.

She thinks in depth about her game. Very analytically. More so than I could ever do. And she's her own harshest critic.

And to think this all started with a goal and the question: "Can I? Should I? Comments?"

Some people don't seem to read very well.

I've played Moby Dick, btw. Once. He didn't win. So does this make him a loser and a liar? Or does it just mean I had a good day and he didn't?

Kinli