adjusting to life after SSH

[HesseJam]

I am also suspect for overapplying. I am running -9 bb/100 over 2000 hands since starting the book. The loss is not all due to bad play since I had flushes only about 1.5% of my hands of which 60% were beaten and 0.5 % of full houses. Two pairs is almost a looser for me. Got big starting pairs way below expectation.

During the bus ride this morning, I had a look at the hand quiz and noticed that I am playing overcards too aggressive, raising too much and not giving up soon enough.

I took it too much to heart that I should not give too much credit to the other players (no, the book is not exactly saying this but I "understood" the book this way, it made me think this way).

Also, I think by reading the book I thought I am now better than I actually am and that the other players are fishier than they actually are.

I'll do some more evaluating of my hands and will plug one hole at a time. Multi-tabling will be cut back to 2 tables max for a while.

[djoyce003]

Yeah, you are playing tables that are slightly tighter than the SSHE tables that are discussed in the book. 30% means 3 people to a flop on average. If you are at a table this tight, i'd leave. I use the external game time window and if i'm at a table that doesn't have at least 4 people that are VPIP over 40, preferably over 50, I leave and search out more fertile hunting grounds. The worst thing you can do is sit at a table with 7 people all at around 25% or less VPIP. If you are good, you might still win, but you better have cards to do it with.

[Rasputin]

[ QUOTE ]
During the bus ride this morning, I had a look at the hand quiz and noticed that I am playing overcards too aggressive, raising too much and not giving up soon enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I'm doing the same things. I think those things are the common traps based on the suggested strategies. I mean, you're supposed to be aggressive with marginal hands in large pots but there's no concrete definition of large pots and there's a thin line between aggressive and stupid.

Seems like overcards, middle pairs, and mid range draws are the difference between the "break even/win a little" range and the "I'm crushing this game" range.

[TheHip41]

I play pokerroom 1-2 all the time. I play like it says in SSH. I smash that game. Everyone is tight/passive. Just keep reading, you'll get it eventually [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Derek

[phildirt]

Hi all

Some basic assumptions that have worked for me in appling SSH: Online (1-2, 2-4, 3-6) play tight limit strategy, Live (2-4, 3-6, 4-8) play loose limit strategy. Online it is tougher to find games that meet the loose criteria. One thing that I find tough is finding an online game that simulates a live game at the levels that play, maybee play money.

Another piont that detirmes how much you will follow Ed's montra is pot size. I play much more aggressvly in large pots in attempt to buy outs. It still sucks when you loose a big pot but in the end it pays. Also what is the quality of your draw w/second pair? Backdoor str8 or flush, What do you think your chances are if you do spike your second pair, what are the chances that he's betting a naked AK, Is he one of us who will bet a draw, or is he the run of the mill buffcatcher who calls with any piece of the board all the way. Factor all this in and use SSH to take maximum advantage of them.

[HesseJam]

[ QUOTE ]
..there's a thin line between aggressive and stupid.
..


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think this is it in a nutshell.

[BSXX]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm doing the same things. I think those things are the common traps based on the suggested strategies. I mean, you're supposed to be aggressive with marginal hands in large pots but there's no concrete definition of large pots and there's a thin line between aggressive and stupid.

Seems like overcards, middle pairs, and mid range draws are the difference between the "break even/win a little" range and the "I'm crushing this game" range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, I have crossed that line a few times. One thing I had to look closer at was "the action". Are they just calling my aggression or playing back at me? Even in the loosest games you have to re-evaluate if they are playing back at you and you only have a marginal hand or draw. Otherwise, we may be making the very mistakes we are trying to exploit.

Was reading a thread yesterday that correctly pointed out the error of assuming all low limit games are ultra loose. I have played in some very solid .50/$1 games and played in some ultra loose $5/$10 games.