How good is your limit poker is a joke!

steamboatin · #1 08-01-2005, 05:57 PM

Okay I am only on page 38 but I lost points for not three betting a rock. Their justification is you might make him lay down a decent hand and their qualification is this is a play you might try every thousand or so hands.

WTF! I don't want to know how to put a move on a rock that should only be tried once evey thousand or so hands. I want to learn good solid +EV poker that brings home the bacon on a steady and consistent basis. If three betting a rock without the absolute nuts or a monster draw isn't -EV then what the Hell is a bad play?

Derek in NYC · #2 08-01-2005, 06:31 PM

Nate gave this book a positive review and found it highly applicable to midlimit games online. I'm holding off on reading it so I can use it as a barometer for my own readiness to go to 10/20. A link to the discussion is here.

steamboatin · #3 08-01-2005, 07:13 PM

That is the reason I bought it, I read that that thread and maybe I am jumping the gun but losing points for folding to a raise from a rock doesn't make sense.

Using a play that should only be used once in every one or two thousand hands as an example sucks.

Luv2DriveTT · #4 08-01-2005, 07:26 PM

Steam -

You played the hand wrong... the book is correct. I know the hand in question, and I would play it exactly the same way as recommended by Bryon Jacobs. You can't get pissed off because a concept is beyond your current level of understanding, I bet if you posted the very same hand in the Small Stakes forum many people there would agree with you, however the more advanced players would all agree with the book's advice.

I read an essay this morning by Mason in Poker Essays I (I read an essay or two every day when I wake up while sitting on the John, perfect bathroom reading IMHO) that discusses the merrits of including many scenarios in HPFAP that are not used in every day play. Mason's point was that although a pro may only encounter a specific scenario once every 6 months in a B&M enviroment, without prior knowlege of how to exploit the opportunity may result in less than stellar resuts. If you can get a hold of it, I'll post the page number later for you to read... its equally applicable to How Good Is Your Limit Hold'Em.

I have to admit I think Jim Brier made up for all his weak tight mistakes in MLP by being involved in WGIYLHE.... I rank it up there as one of the best non-2+2 books around. Its the book I wish Ed Miller would have written first, and hopefully will someday release none the less.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

raisins · #5 08-01-2005, 07:41 PM

You are misrepresenting the boook. The part you have a problem with is Hand #3 Question #5. You are not losing points for folding to a raise from a rock. The rock is being forced out, possibly with a better hand, by your raise of a lag that the rock might not recognize as a lag because the rock just joined the game. You are also raising to get a free showdown on most rivers because you will have the better hand than the original better many times. You may also catch some rivers that will let you get another value bet in.

You've read little over 10% of the meat of the book. Calling it "a joke" based on your misinterpretation of a small portion is premature.

That being said I don't agree with all the answers in the book. I am curious which answers Nate tha' Great and Rory had issues with. Personally I find Hand #10 Question #5 a bit questionable myself.

raisins

Jordan Olsommer · #6 08-01-2005, 07:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Mason's point was that although a pro may only encounter a specific scenario once every 6 months in a B&M enviroment, without prior knowlege of how to exploit the opportunity may result in less than stellar resuts. If you can get a hold of it, I'll post the page number later for you to read... its equally applicable to How Good Is Your Limit Hold'Em.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be a good argument for including the idea of three-betting every 1000 hands or so as a suggestion when explaining the answers in the back of the book, but deducting points for choosing the play that is going to be correct 99.9% of the time seems a bit silly to me.

steamboatin · #7 08-01-2005, 08:37 PM

I respect your opinion and I bought the book because I want to improve my game. I appreciate the feed back but I am going to have to let this one bounce around inside my melon for a while.

I still have a lot to learn and maybe the rocks at higher limits are different than the low limit rocks. If a low limit rock raises, He has the goods and he isn't folding. He only plays a very few hands and once he gets a hand good enough to raise, He ain't folding. He will most likely check and call but He ain't folding.

I did misread the hand, The flop is 277 rainbow and I have AJo, Mr Rock raises and the Maniac three bets. I'm folding everytime.

I'll reread the hand but it will take a while for me to understand how a reraise is a good play. Yes if MR Rock will lay down a winner, your chances improve but you have to be behind here most of the time.

My OP states MR Rock three bets, that is incorrect, he raises and the maniac three bets.

Luv2DriveTT · #8 08-01-2005, 09:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mason's point was that although a pro may only encounter a specific scenario once every 6 months in a B&M enviroment, without prior knowlege of how to exploit the opportunity may result in less than stellar resuts. If you can get a hold of it, I'll post the page number later for you to read... its equally applicable to How Good Is Your Limit Hold'Em.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be a good argument for including the idea of three-betting every 1000 hands or so as a suggestion when explaining the answers in the back of the book, but deducting points for choosing the play that is going to be correct 99.9% of the time seems a bit silly to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jordon:

The OP misrepresented the hand. I suggest you get a copy of the book and check it out for yourself.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Luv2DriveTT · #9 08-01-2005, 09:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]

That being said I don't agree with all the answers in the book. I am curious which answers Nate tha' Great and Rory had issues with. Personally I find Hand #10 Question #5 a bit questionable myself.

raisins

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you here, the recommendation seems backwards to me. luckily both recommendations are worth nearly the same points, the author obviously realized this is a situation that could swing either way.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

steamboatin · #10 08-01-2005, 09:41 PM

I had it backwards, the rock raises, then the Maniac three bets and I am supposed to reraise with A high, once out of every one or two thousand hands. Because I am playing the players, not my cards.