A Further and Necessary Clarification

[CrisBrown]

Hi All,

I've been chatting with Ulysses privately, and he brought up a point that I need to address in regard to my previous post about the 92s hand that I played recently.

I did not offer that hand as an example of an excellent play. It was an incredibly risky play, and one I might make only once in a month or a year, based on a very specific set of circumstances and a very specific read of an opponent.

I offered that hand as an example of how vulnerable you can be if your play is too habitual, and too readable. If good players pick up your betting patterns and your style -- even online where there are theoretically few tells -- you can get busted even by a crappy hand, simply because your opponent can be sufficiently confident that his/her crappy hand is better than what you're holding.

That's all that hand was intended to illustrate.

More specifically, it was not intended to illustrate my or any other successful style of play, or an approach to playing suited trash. Barring extraordinary circumstances, and perhaps even given them, it was an extremely rash and risky move. It worked -- that time -- but I'm not looking to repeat it.

I say this because I don't want newer players to look at that and think "Gee, that's how you make a lot of money at NLH ring games." It's not. That goose lays maybe one golden egg in your entire poker career, and trying to get more is likely to get your goose cooked and your bankroll emptied.

And that's why I try to mention -- as often as I can -- that you need to think critically about the hand advice you see posted here. This is an incredibly valuable forum, and you can learn a lot here. These forums have improved my play a hundred-fold in the six months I've been reading and posting here. Most of that improvement has come in the form of people telling me what an idiot I was (and at times still am).

So there's a lot to be learned here, but because it's a discussion forum, the information is not presented in stepwise learning increments. Novices will read about plays by experienced posters, and the same strategies that enrich an skilled player will bankrupt a novice.

So, be realistic about what you read here. No matter how skilled or seemingly "expert" the poster may be. The Bob Ciaffone hand about AA is another example of this. That hand was not played in a $50 PartyPoker ring game. It was the WSOP and both he and his opponent were seasoned pros. Different buy-in, different depth of money, different level of opponents, different strategies.

So, since the horse is dead, I'll kick it one more time:

Be careful about the advice you choose to adopt here. Play at your own level, and learn at your own pace.

Cris

[Ben]

Great post Cris.

Personally, I think the WSOP and WPT broadcasts are doing more to add to my bankroll than any other outside factor. New players watch these events and think the type of moves the pros make are going to work for them at Party...

-Ben