WTF !?

Read these articles if you got a minute.

www.pokersavvy.com/article/wildholdemi.html
www.pokersavvy.com/article/wildholdemii.html

1. The author clames that playing the 'Sklansky way' will cause you to take big swings in your bank roll. Can anyone even MAKE UP a theory that could explain this?

2. The autor also basicly claims that he could whip up on any Sklansky type player by playing his alternative style. What weaknesses do we have that a loose but some how still 'good' poker player can exploit?

[gharp]

Damn, why did I follow these links and read this crap? I want the last 10 minutes of my life back.

Thanks a lot. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Kumubou]

[ QUOTE ]
1. The author clames that playing the 'Sklansky way' will cause you to take big swings in your bank roll. Can anyone even MAKE UP a theory that could explain this?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah -- it's called "you are playing poker." The games he describes seem to be very wild and very loose, and of course you are going to take huge swings -- that's what happens in loose-aggressive games!

[ QUOTE ]
2. The autor also basicly claims that he could whip up on any Sklansky type player by playing his alternative style. What weaknesses do we have that a loose but some how still 'good' poker player can exploit?

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably LAG it up and bring a shiny luckbox with him. I could see someone like this (especailly someone typecast as one who makes too many 'good' laydowns) getting run the hell over, especially heads up. Take a decent full-ring TAG and drop him in a 30/20 6-max LAGTAGfest and watch him wilt.

Given the way he sees that style of poker (which he has as "...you are playing mighty tight, and you're spending hour after hour sitting quietly and waiting for the virtual nuts.", which is flat-out wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
I got chewed up in multi-way pots when I found myself holding top pair, top kicker on the flop. I'd come out betting and finding the action capped coming back to me against four opponents. WWSD? Fold. Later I suffered serious gambler's nausea when I realized that I'd mucked the winner and the guy raking in the chips had some stellar holding like pocket fours.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the brand of poker Sklansky advises, that's playing like a nit. Although Malmuth has sugggested that such a wild game is not all that great to be in, even though it can be massively +EV -- the swings are brutal, and with each bet going into the pot their longshot draws become more and more correct to chase.

[ QUOTE ]
What kind of hands did they show? 10-3 off, 5-8 off, and those were some of the nicer hands. If you took control of the betting, you'd better believe you were going to get called down to the river if they caught even the tiniest part of the flop. You could be in there with pocket kings to a Q-7-2 rainbow flop, but if Jim has the deuce (which he's already playing like it's the nuts), you'd better pray he doesn't hit his raggy kicker or another deuce 'cause you can bet your ass he's going to call you down to the river to get it, and checkraise you if he hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

His problem with someone chasing a 5-outer against his overpair is exactly what?... Does he not like money?

[ QUOTE ]
(What Would Sklansky Do in a place like Club X? Gnaw his own arms off and run screaming around the card room, blood gushing from his useless shoulders.)

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he (and any decent player) would value-bet their strong made hands until the cows came home -- and then value bet some more. I would love to play in a loose game like that where people call me down with any part of the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
But when he says, "If you hold JJ and the pot has been raised and reraised before the action gets to you, you should fold," (emphasis mine -K) I can't help but giggle. At Club X, the first raise could be A-5 suited and the reraise could be pocket sixes. And that's if people are staying disciplined.

[/ QUOTE ]

Way to take his advice completely out of context, and to not think at all. Gee, if people are capping with any two are you folding JJ? Hell no.

[ QUOTE ]
If you're a Sklansky disciple and you find yourself at any of the many local card places around the country where they play wild, no fold'em hold'em, eventually you will end up in a lovely, padded white room munching brightly-colored pills and muttering to yourself over and over again, "How could she call the flop? How could she call the flop?"

[/ QUOTE ]

This man needs to read SSHE -- a book (written by Sklansky ZOMG!!1!oneone!) that was written to show how to optimally pwn these ultra-loose no fold'em games. What a [censored] donk.

-K

Actually, playing "Sklansky's way" (meaning, squeezing any +EV situation for all its worth) will cause a little more variance than folding some marginal +EV situations. Here is one example: You are on a draw to the nuts on the turn, and the pot is laying you EXACTLY the odds you need to draw it. Lets say it is a 22-1 shot, and it is therefore a big pot. You fold if you miss, and you gain a bet if you hit. Your pot odds are even, your implied odds are one bet. There is A LOT of variance in this, but it will have a EV of approximately +0.05 big bets per situation. But, there is a lot of variation in that, as that situation could realisitically come up 30 or 40 times without you hitting your two outer.

For the second point, the "alternative style" to Sklansky would be purposely taking -EV situations, so to that I say, bring it on.

[VoraciousReader]

[ QUOTE ]
1. The author clames that playing the 'Sklansky way' will cause you to take big swings in your bank roll. Can anyone even MAKE UP a theory that could explain this?


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a theory....now this is really deep, upper-level stuff here, so I'll give you some time to get ready for it. If you haven't logged at least 15K hands in PokerTracker, you're probably not ready and should stop reading right now. (Hey, I don't think I'm ready for it.)

I mean it. Read at your own risk.

"Playing POKER, period...will cause you to have big swings in your bankroll. The only way you won't have large swings is if you are so terrible that your bankroll essentially moves in ONE DIRECTION."

It's only a theory, mind. And just keep it between us. Don't tell anybody else.