More Replayers Plzzzz

Ive only recently played sngs seriously, and I cant stop losing money. I watched the replayer on the FAQ (hostile) and it helped me alot. I was wondering if any of the pros here (raptor, durron, adar, etc.) would be willing to post any of their low limit hand histories (if they still remember wat low limit is). The entire game as opposed to one or 2 bubble hands.

And would it ever be ok to post my entire game? It seems pretty fast to review an sng if you assume no reads (8 tablin the 10s).

Thxs to all replies, Brian

[citanul]

how about totally random non responsive responses, like this one, instead:

if you're breaking even 8 tabling the 10s, perhaps you should play *many* fewer tables, until you learn to beat the games.

citanul

[pokerlaw]

[ QUOTE ]

if you're breaking even 8 tabling the 10s, perhaps you should play *many* fewer tables, until you learn to beat the games.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

solid suggestion. The point of MTing is to increase $$/hr. If you are in the red/not beating them, well, you are just increasing the rate at which you bleed away $$/hr - not a good thing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

=( iunno if i like random non resposive response...

Ive thought of that, and the reason that I'm still 8 tablin is because I want to beat this game without reads. It is evidently possible because the top players here 16 table high stakes. I use to play one table and did fairly well. I saw no use in adding tables slowly cuz its so hard to get a read with 3+ tables. Am I wrong?

Is playing fewer tables the only way to get better? I just dont see what I can do at 3 tables that I cant do at 8. but Blindly listening to Cit has to be +EV.Brian

[suited_ace]

Then watch TV, read the forums, search for random stuff on the net while you play 1 table. FWIW, that's just not very smart. There's a learning curve to the game, just bear with it. You need to consistently beat the game *with* reads before you can even think about multi-tabling.

[lorinda]

US-PGA 2006 shocker

TIGER TO PLAY WITH THREE CLUBS

In a shocking move today, Tiger Woods threw most of the clubs out of his golf bag.

"My putting has been a bit rough recently, so I chucked the putter in the lake" explained Woods.

"Also, one of my drives went a bit to the right, so I snapped my wood in half" continuted the nutty golfer.

"I saw Greg Norman win a tournament once with only TWO clubs on his local pitch 'n' putt course, and I want to do something similar" he explained.

Woods will be using a 7-iron, an 8-iron and a pointed stick to mount his challenge on the USPGA title tomorrow.

Lori

[citanul]

well if you're making a ton of mistakes, and breaking even, adding tables isn't going to help.

clearly the games are beatable without reads. learning to play using reads is nice and all, but also not all that important to making a passable amount at higher stakes games. i would suggest playing fewer, say 4 to start with, until you are at least winning. what you do past then, is up to you. but since you clearly need to be thinking more about *something* so that you can either make better decisions and learn to hardwire them, or to notice when you've made a mistake in some fashion, slowing down your hands/second would be a good thing universally.

addendum: i don't know of a single player beating 16 tables of high stakes games.

anyways, send me a pm so i remember this later, and i'll see what i can do about posting some 30s and below on the replayer site.

citanul

[citanul]

nh.

The above post wins this thread. Nice work Lori.

[rybones]

This is just my take, so do with this what u want.

Reads are nothing more than experience! Thus the "top" players do use reads!!

Read: "hey I have seen this before, I'll bet he fold if I push over the top."

The important word there is "seen." You cannot "see" anything if you jump from playing 1 or 2 tables to 8 tables. play 1 or 2 and try to make (literally write) 2 notes for each player. It is a huge pain in the arse, but if you can do that you will begin to "see" things. One of my favorite notes is "min-raiser". The better note is when you can say "min-raiser who will ... when ... happens."

As always, please feel free to comment or no.

Ryan