Brunson Question

[pokerjoker]

So I just finished rereading Super System, and it is making mroe and more sense. Here is a passage that doesn't make sense to me though. It seems like Doyle is being supersticious.

(Talking about small suited connectors)

"Normally I wouldnt want to get more than 5% (maybe 10%) of my money involved before the flop with this type of hand. If I get as much as 20% of my money in with that hand....I'd have to be rushing. I wouldn't do it unless I was on a streak."

-is there a logical basis to this or does the WSOP champ actually beleive he has better odds of hitting his hand if he won the last hand?

[Tuben]

Ofcourse he dont [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[canis582]

He believes that players are more likely to fold to one of his bets if they see that he is on a rush.

[GrunchCan]

Maybe Brunson felt that you get more fold equity when you're running hot.

[AZK]

no logical basis, yes it actually sounds like this is what he believed. Though there is a lot more to it psychology wise then what he wrote...

[Cardinal991]

No you're not misreading it. Brunson is a big believer in "riding the rush."

Whether this takes his credibility down a peg or two is an open question.

[yvesaint]

I think this applies much more to live games, where it's a lot more obvious that you're on a rush.

[Malachii]

[ QUOTE ]
Whether this takes his credibility down a peg or two is an open question.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[wtfsvi]

Yes, from what he writes in other sections of the book it's quite obvious that he believes in rushes. That sounds silly, but you can have a pragmatic approach to it. It is right because it works. If it works because of psychological reasons both relating to your own and your oponents play, or for some other reason, can be considered less important.

(I don't think it's less important, but he might think that without it being as stupid as it sounds.)

[Niwa]

good post.