Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Just curious what people think of this:

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~darse/Pap...mt-primer.html

I have used it at the free poker tournaments here in Toronto and have found that I can almost always make it through to the latter stages of the tournament with a decent stack. I have played 9 times, winning once, 2 second place finishes, one 4th and one 7th.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

My primer is much better.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...mp;o=&vc=1

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

I'll read that when I never want to win another tournament.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

This is like the 3rd time I've seen you're primer.

The poker elite should be quaking in fear. The bold advice advocated in your primer borders on revolutionary. I predict that it transform the world of poker as we now know it.

Variety says "Boffo"

And to think I fell for that whole "Theory of Poker" tripe..



PS What do I need to do to acquire a signed copy.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

You seem to have a completely opposite strategy - I am reading yours now - however, I have one question

You wrote:

"The gap principle states that you need a bigger hand to raise than to call a raise."

However

http://www.pokerlistings.com/tournam...he-gap-concept

The term "gap concept" was first introduced by the excellent poker writer David Sklansky (see Editor's Pick for book reviews). This concept means that you will usually need a better hand to play against someone who has opened the betting than what you need to open with yourself.


It would seem that your "gap concept" is the opposite of Sklansky's.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]

I'll read that when I never want to win another tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean betgo's or Darse's?

Please elaborate, if possible.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
You seem to have a completely opposite strategy - I am reading yours now - however, I have one question

You wrote:

"The gap principle states that you need a bigger hand to raise than to call a raise."

However

http://www.pokerlistings.com/tournam...he-gap-concept

The term "gap concept" was first introduced by the excellent poker writer David Sklansky (see Editor's Pick for book reviews). This concept means that you will usually need a better hand to play against someone who has opened the betting than what you need to open with yourself.


It would seem that your "gap concept" is the opposite of Sklansky's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please read my guide 3 times, and read the klinks and recommended reading in it. You have a lot to learn.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Betgo's.

Never read Darse's.. Maybe i'll look at it later.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Hank,.. Please do not listen to this man who tells you "You have alot to learn".

His advice he posts on this forum is hideously wrong and is taking many beginners into a death trap.

Trust me on this.. betgo has ALOT to learn about tournament poker. I wouldn't take advice from him if I were you.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You seem to have a completely opposite strategy - I am reading yours now - however, I have one question

You wrote:

"The gap principle states that you need a bigger hand to raise than to call a raise."

However

http://www.pokerlistings.com/tournam...he-gap-concept

The term "gap concept" was first introduced by the excellent poker writer David Sklansky (see Editor's Pick for book reviews). This concept means that you will usually need a better hand to play against someone who has opened the betting than what you need to open with yourself.


It would seem that your "gap concept" is the opposite of Sklansky's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please read my guide 3 times, and read the klinks and recommended reading in it. You have a lot to learn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Setting aside what others are telling me for the moment - I still do not see how reading your guide 3 times will help answer this question.

You are saying that the gap concept says you need a bigger hand to raise than to call a raise and Sklansky says you need a bigger hand to call a raise than you to do open the betting - that seems like a fairly clear case of two people saying the opposite things - and I am asking you to explain why that difference exists.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

I think sarcasm is completely lost on everyone who's posting in this thread.

...except me....

...and betgo....

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

I don't see this forest you are talking about, There are too many trees in the way....

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Sarcasm does not tend to work very well on the internet.

However, when it is as blatent as here, I think its pretty easy to spot.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Still no comments on the Darse primer...so I am bumping this.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

I just read it on my lunch break.. It's pretty standard, solid NL tournament strategy.

You'll do better than the Average Joe if you follow it to a T.

My only quarrel would be starting hand selection. I think small suited connectors need to be played occaisionally in the proper situations (i.e. action to you in middle/late position, with just 1 or 2 limpers and other situations similar).

Overall though, it looks like a good, solid primer to work off of.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just read it on my lunch break.. It's pretty standard, solid NL tournament strategy.

You'll do better than the Average Joe if you follow it to a T.

My only quarrel would be starting hand selection. I think small suited connectors need to be played occaisionally in the proper situations (i.e. action to you in middle/late position, with just 1 or 2 limpers and other situations similar).

Overall though, it looks like a good, solid primer to work off of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks - just curious - in the situation you described, would you recommend coming in with a raise or a limp?

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

As the primer said.. Raise. Whenever you play a pot, and you have the opportunity to be the first raiser.. Be it!

Re: Henry Tran two weeks ago in the WSOP Harrah's AC circuit event.. everyone limping in with marginal hands.. He raises with Q-J.. He ends up winning a huge pot.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Thanks again.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
As the primer said.. Raise. Whenever you play a pot, and you have the opportunity to be the first raiser.. Be it!


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd just like to say that I think this is horrible advice. (yes, I realize Ferguson has said the above countless times. i still disagree w/ it)

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As the primer said.. Raise. Whenever you play a pot, and you have the opportunity to be the first raiser.. Be it!


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd just like to say that I think this is horrible advice. (yes, I realize Ferguson has said the above countless times. i still disagree w/ it)

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

I can see the logic of both positions.

If you raise, then you may knock some of the limpers out - especially considering that they probably don't have particularly strong hands - so you have a chance to win the pot right there.

In addition, after the flop, there is a better chance that they will check around to you - which gives you a chance to either raise and try to take the pot or to get a free card.

If you call, your only real hope is to hit a favorable flop - otherwise, you are going to have to fold to anything.

Personally, I like the raise.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As the primer said.. Raise. Whenever you play a pot, and you have the opportunity to be the first raiser.. Be it!


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd just like to say that I think this is horrible advice. (yes, I realize Ferguson has said the above countless times. i still disagree w/ it)

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

I can see the logic of both positions.

If you raise, then you may knock some of the limpers out - especially considering that they probably don't have particularly strong hands - so you have a chance to win the pot right there.

In addition, after the flop, there is a better chance that they will check around to you - which gives you a chance to either raise and try to take the pot or to get a free card.

If you call, your only real hope is to hit a favorable flop - otherwise, you are going to have to fold to anything.

Personally, I like the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

a) playing in raised pots out of position w/ deep stacks sucks
b) allowing yourself to limp first in helps w/ your shania

those would be the 2 biggest reasons

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As the primer said.. Raise. Whenever you play a pot, and you have the opportunity to be the first raiser.. Be it!


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd just like to say that I think this is horrible advice. (yes, I realize Ferguson has said the above countless times. i still disagree w/ it)

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

I can see the logic of both positions.

If you raise, then you may knock some of the limpers out - especially considering that they probably don't have particularly strong hands - so you have a chance to win the pot right there.

In addition, after the flop, there is a better chance that they will check around to you - which gives you a chance to either raise and try to take the pot or to get a free card.

If you call, your only real hope is to hit a favorable flop - otherwise, you are going to have to fold to anything.

Personally, I like the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

b) allowing yourself to limp first in helps w/ your shania


[/ QUOTE ]

You are going to have to explain what this means.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Everybody has there own style.. But that is definently one successful way to play NL Tournaments.

Certaintly there are exceptions.. If you have alot of aggressive players behind you and you're UTG, you can limp in with A-A, knowing you'll get raised.

In general though, I think it's pretty good advice, and Chris Ferguson is only one of the great tournament players of our time.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

i have to run in a minute. but here's a quick way to think of it.

you're in ep and you pick up AA. you want to get some $$ and the table is aggressive, so you limp first in trying to limp-reraise. the only problem is that YOU NEVER LIMP FIRST IN. you only raise! this allows everyone at the table to immediately put you on a huge hand (or at least be extremely cautious going forward). now, if you limp in w/ say 66 or JTs in similar situations, villian(s) can't immediately identify what your hand is. this allows you to make more money those times you have KK/AA and are looking for the limp/reraise because they will be forced to raise hands like TT or KQs from LP. if you only limp w/ AA/KK, they will just limp looking to bust you since your range is so narrow. it's incredibly easy to play against someone that has his hand face up on the table.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Agree.. I just posted that.. In general though, you want to enter the pots with your opponents thinking, "he had a big hand." whether you have K-K or 4-6 suited.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
i have to run in a minute. but here's a quick way to think of it.

you're in ep and you pick up AA. you want to get some $$ and the table is aggressive, so you limp first in trying to limp-reraise. the only problem is that YOU NEVER LIMP FIRST IN. you only raise! this allows everyone at the table to immediately put you on a huge hand (or at least be extremely cautious going forward). now, if you limp in w/ say 66 or JTs in similar situations, villian(s) can't immediately identify what your hand is. this allows you to make more money those times you have KK/AA and are looking for the limp/reraise because they will be forced to raise hands like TT or KQs from LP. if you only limp w/ AA/KK, they will just limp looking to bust you since your range is so narrow. it's incredibly easy to play against someone that has his hand face up on the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that Darse's approach is to only go in on good hands and to always raise a similar amount - that way, your opponents can put you on a good hand, but they can't tell WHAT hand it is - only that it is probably KT or higher or a pair or perhaps a suited connector - if you raise the same with 67s as you do with AKs as you do with AA, then they won't have any idea when you do have AA.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Hey, what about me... [ QUOTE ]
I think sarcasm is completely lost on everyone who's posting in this thread.

...except me....

...and betgo....




[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i have to run in a minute. but here's a quick way to think of it.

you're in ep and you pick up AA. you want to get some $$ and the table is aggressive, so you limp first in trying to limp-reraise. the only problem is that YOU NEVER LIMP FIRST IN. you only raise! this allows everyone at the table to immediately put you on a huge hand (or at least be extremely cautious going forward). now, if you limp in w/ say 66 or JTs in similar situations, villian(s) can't immediately identify what your hand is. this allows you to make more money those times you have KK/AA and are looking for the limp/reraise because they will be forced to raise hands like TT or KQs from LP. if you only limp w/ AA/KK, they will just limp looking to bust you since your range is so narrow. it's incredibly easy to play against someone that has his hand face up on the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that Darse's approach is to only go in on good hands and to always raise a similar amount - that way, your opponents can put you on a good hand

[/ QUOTE ]

And thats why its a horrible approach

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

Most online players aren't observant enough to recognize this, especially with how many few hands you'll show down.

I don't think it's a negative to be known as a player who plays "Big Cards."

But indeed, you should open up your hands to smaller suited connectors and one-gappers.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i have to run in a minute. but here's a quick way to think of it.

you're in ep and you pick up AA. you want to get some $$ and the table is aggressive, so you limp first in trying to limp-reraise. the only problem is that YOU NEVER LIMP FIRST IN. you only raise! this allows everyone at the table to immediately put you on a huge hand (or at least be extremely cautious going forward). now, if you limp in w/ say 66 or JTs in similar situations, villian(s) can't immediately identify what your hand is. this allows you to make more money those times you have KK/AA and are looking for the limp/reraise because they will be forced to raise hands like TT or KQs from LP. if you only limp w/ AA/KK, they will just limp looking to bust you since your range is so narrow. it's incredibly easy to play against someone that has his hand face up on the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that Darse's approach is to only go in on good hands and to always raise a similar amount - that way, your opponents can put you on a good hand

[/ QUOTE ]

And thats why its a horrible approach

[/ QUOTE ]

You want your opponents to put you on a good hand pre-flop - you just want them to be wary of HOW good.

Re: Darse\'s NL Tournament Primer
 

[ QUOTE ]
Most online players aren't observant enough to recognize this, especially with how many few hands you'll show down.

I don't think it's a negative to be known as a player who plays "Big Cards."

But indeed, you should open up your hands to smaller suited connectors and one-gappers.


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, couldn't have said it better if tried. Sometimes I like to raise from EP w/ suited connectors to disguise their value, but only 1x my table image has been established. Otherwise, I like to limp from LP.