Do not understand Brunson in Super System

[THATWACOKID]

I'm assuming he played this way with nuts as well.

[GFunk911]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Iceman's comments are right on point. Brunson raised with draws where he might be a dog but still had outs to hit. He did not call his stack off to allin bets with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has been a while since I've read it so correct me if I'm wrong -- but I thought that at one point Doyle said that if he raised with a draw and got set all-in, he would call even if he was taking slightly the worst of it, because he wanted them to know that anytime they played back at him, they may have to play for their whole stack. He wanted to discourage people from playing back at him without huge hands.

But, I may have remembered the passage wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I didn't know the context of the thread, I would think you were talking about Gus Hansen

[gomberg]

You guys all need to reread his stuff very carefully. He's not the greatest writer and his advice is easily misinterpreted. I remember reading he DOES NOT push all-in with a flush draw because it's too easy to see by default. He does push in with straight draws though.

Just skip the 1rst half of that section and you'll be better off. His advice on specific big pocket pairs and other hands is great - and the postflop situations with them.

[iceman5]

I dont have the book in front of me, but I think he said he PREFERED to do it with a straight draw but would push with a flush draw also.

By the way, Im sure you guys know thats hes stated numerous times that he doesnt play that way anymore especially when he plays online. SOmehow I cant even imagine Doyle playing online, but he says he does.

[Leptyne]

I was re-reading his section last night and I'll be doing it again this evening. I believe your quote is accurate and it is confusing. I think Brunsun means what he says, and says what he means, but the writing of his thoughts and explanations is certainly lacking in clarity.

Its important to remember that he is talking about live play only, and most of his play works better in shorthanded (4 player games) as opposed to full ring. I'm not sure, but I believe he is talking about unlimited (no-cap) buy-in.

His style is intended to do two things:

1. The first is to make it impossible for an opponent to put him on a hand.
2. The second is to make every opponent aware that when they enter a pot with Brunson their entire stack is at risk. He may push at any time and he may have the nuts, or be on a draw. I believe he wrote that he never pushes a stone cold bluff without an out.

He establishes this style from the moment he sits down, then immediately changes gears. He goes from fast to slow and tight to loose often enough that no one can be sure what mode he is in.

He is definitely not talking about on-line play. Since I play strictly online and have no experience with the live play he's talking about I know why I'm confused. He's not writing this book for me, the online player. I'll continue to read the No Limit chapter, and as Gomberg suggested, take what applies to online play.

[GFunk911]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a limit player trying to learn no limit.
Brunson in Super System said he was very aggressive and stole a lot of small pots. As a result when the big pots came along, he usually had the worse hands than his opponents. He said that was no problem because all the small pots he stole paid for those situations. Am I misunderstanding him? It appears to be absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a vital item here that you must make sure you don't miss in order to understand Doyle.

What Doyle is saying is that, for example, he may push 11 times, and have a 33% chance to win if he is called. On average, he gets called 1 out of 11 times. On each pot that is folded to him, he wins 1k. On the pot where he gets called, he puts 10k into the pot. In one sense, he is on a "freeroll," since the 10k won on folded pots is now being used in the 11th pot.

He is NOT saying that playing a large pot as a dog is ok BY ITSELF. He is saying that, as part of his overall strategy, he ends up playing most big pots as a dog.

If you here somebody say, for example in a tournament, that "he had a big stack so he could afford to play this hand as a dog," that is NOT the same thing

[Big_Jim]

You assume correctly.

[Tony.T]

He is talking about folding equity, since he is a very aggresive player. He is not talking about calling a big all-in with a draw, he is talking about being called down or him self calling because of potodds when he already has money invested



Easy easy easy




Tony

[stu-unger]

im looking at the book right now and in a peanut shell he says i would bet all of my draws strong an if i got re-raised i would push not call. he definitly doesnt say to call of all of your chips on a draw. He just was saying to be aggressive all the time and put fear in your opponents but, he says himself that that style has no place in the game today unless u want to lose.