|
|
|
|
#1
08-31-2005, 03:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you should be limping all that often. [/ QUOTE ] I agree, but the 2/4 tables are much less aggressive in general. So when you limp you are less likely to get raised. The problem is that there will probably be many limpers behind you. This may or maynot be good for your hand. So why not fold, play really tight, but play 3 or 4 tables instead. 
|
|
#2
08-31-2005, 03:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
This is a valid point, Jon. I don't enjoy multitabling stud, and rarely do it. I'll usually play a table of stud and one of holdem. I never play more than two tables total, since I don't find it enjoyable. Most of the folks I know who play poker for a living or as a side source of income do play four or more tables (unless they play much higher), and I agree that giving up a little marginal value by limping less in favor of playing more tables is almost surely more profitable.
But since I'm not interested in maximizing the money I make, but rather in maximizing the amount I win at my single table, I think limping lots of hands is +EV for me since the other players generally will pay me off if I hit, the game's not that aggressive and I'm much better than almost all my opponents so I want opportunities to play with them. The big difference between this and 3-6 (which I also play alot) is that it's much less worthwhile to raise to try to thin the field or win right there, since the underante at 2-4 vs. the overante at 3-6 drastically changes your risk/reward equation.
|
|
#3
08-31-2005, 12:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
Not to sound like a dick...but.... I laugh at your $200. [/ QUOTE ] Right now, I'd blow the inmates of Cell Block D at San Quentin to only be down 50 BB's right now.
|
|
#4
08-31-2005, 12:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Not to sound like a dick...but.... I laugh at your $200. [/ QUOTE ] Right now, I'd blow the inmates of Cell Block D at San Quentin to only be down 50 BB's right now. [/ QUOTE ] Someone remind me to stop gambling before I get to this point
|
|
#6
08-31-2005, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Not to sound like a dick...but.... I laugh at your $200. [/ QUOTE ] Right now, I'd blow the inmates of Cell Block D at San Quentin to only be down 50 BB's right now. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know where Beer is at, but I am in the midst of a 150 BB freefall at card rooms 2/4 and 4/8, I hate the 3/6 structure. Although since it came on the heels of a 200bb up swing I can't complain too much. This game is like a god damned rollercoaster ride.
|
|
#7
08-31-2005, 05:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
Not to sound like a dick...but.... I laugh at your $200. [/ QUOTE ] It's not the money. $200 doesn't bug me. 50 big bets does. It's the LOSING that bugs me, y'dig? And at 2/4, no less. [ QUOTE ] It does suck having big hands go down. Last night some monkey called 2 cold on 3rd, a double on 4th from me showing AA with 2 4 A 6. He won. The fact that you could lose 50 BB in just 100 hands is good though. Because it means you are getting action, and perhaps some lose raises. Just keep at it. [/ QUOTE ] I'll probably come back because I am determined to become world-class at all the games. But I'm going to take some time off and study some more. Maybe stick to hi/lo for awhile.
|
|
#8
08-31-2005, 07:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
It's the LOSING that bugs me, y'dig? And at 2/4, no less [/ QUOTE ] I definetly feel for you here. The difference in "happiness" I feel when I book a +10-15 BB win vs booking a -5 BB lose is soooo much bigger than the difference between +10-15 vs +50-70. Even though this should not be the case. I play to "win" (However much that will bother Jeffage and a 2nd poster I respect that I can't remeber right now (beta or Blumpkin))
|
|
#9
09-01-2005, 07:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
As some of the best poker players have said, the game is not about winning in the short term, it's about making good decisions. As long as you do that, you are going to win in the long term. It's really important to get away from worrying about your session results, because it can lead to two things -- the first and most serious is going on various forms of tilt. The second, and more insidious, can be developing a "low variance" (aka weak tight) playing style that can mean you'll have more winning sessions but win less overall. Both of these issues, related to being results oriented, can and do turn players with excellent knowledge from winners to losers. It's really just a mental thing, like having the discipline to fold your split 10s when a K raises and a J calls in front of you.
|
|
#10
09-01-2005, 07:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I am eternally running bad at stud (no content).
[ QUOTE ]
As some of the best poker players have said, the game is not about winning in the short term, it's about making good decisions. As long as you do that, you are going to win in the long term. It's really important to get away from worrying about your session results, because it can lead to two things -- the first and most serious is going on various forms of tilt. The second, and more insidious, can be developing a "low variance" (aka weak tight) playing style that can mean you'll have more winning sessions but win less overall. Both of these issues, related to being results oriented, can and do turn players with excellent knowledge from winners to losers. It's really just a mental thing, like having the discipline to fold your split 10s when a K raises and a J calls in front of you. [/ QUOTE ] I know, I know. I try not to let it affect me play. And weak tight is the last thing I'd be. I'm much closer to LAG.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
