Super System NL Holdem Section

"Aggression is mathematical more than psychological."
I disagree. Some people are aggressive, others are passive. It's human nature, not math.
"He says don't bluff a calling station and play tight at loose games." You even agree with me. There's no math involved here, you're just playing the player.
"In a typical live 1/2 NL game, playing real aggressive is not going to work for most people. With people going allin with top pair, it is easier to just play tight and look to get payed off with big hands. This approach would not work in the games Brunson plays in."
That's true, to an extent. It depends how good your draw is. However, aggressive pre-flop betting in these types of games can be beneficial as well. Generally you get guys to play hands they shouldn't be playing, they call raises with hands much too weak to call raises with. However, such games tend to feature unbelievable suckouts.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
I am about to read the section in super system 1 on NL holdem

[/ QUOTE ]

Read it in SS2. The SS2 version is updated a little, but the typesetting in the older edition will drive you nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
I rarely play limit, I don't get it. I'll play micro-limits on UB once in a great while, but that's just to kill time. As far as jumping between cash/tournament, full ring/shorthanded, loose/passive, well, that goes with the territory and you have to be mindful of where you're at. Often, when I'm at a table online, after I've stacked a couple of guys, people begin to leave the table, they don't want to play with me anymore. Those that remain keep trying to trap me. So, the game has changed and you have to recognize that and adjust. Sometime at the B&M a few loose players leave after a while and are replaced by new, different players. Maybe the new guys are loose too, maybe they're tight-passive. It does change the complexion of the game and you must adjust. As for playing in cash games and tournaments, yes, there is a difference and you cannot forget where you're at. But, I don't think it'll harm you to play a sit and go or two online, then go play a ring game for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

russianbear. excellent response!

and you pointed out something i'd forgot to bring up (or i'd forgotten about totally)..... when i played alot of shorthanded, i would often run over some guys and then they'd either fight back or new people would show up and change the table conditions (not just loose/tight, but moves too as you mentioned).

my generic point (which i didn't explain very well) is that at a certain level eventually everything becomes a "player read" and/or "situation read"... and there is only so much books can teach you... but i like your ideas about "psych of poker" and "inside the poker mind"

touche

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]

Aggression is mathematical more than psychological. A semibluff works because of folding equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is rarely the case at the levels that most of us mere mortals play. If you put a big raise on Phil Ivey, he is sitting there putting you on a range of hands, figuring the implied odds vs. the odds of making his hand, reviewing your previous play, etc.

If you put a big raise on IveyEnvy at PP in a $100 NL game, he is sitting there thinking: does he have it, am I beat, I think this is a good hand, I don't know, maybe I should fold, I need another beer, is this guy any good, maybe I should call, etc.

Or the guy immediately came back all in over the top of you with T8o, because he saw Gus Hansen win a WPT event that way.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Aggression is mathematical more than psychological. A semibluff works because of folding equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is rarely the case at the levels that most of us mere mortals play. If you put a big raise on Phil Ivey, he is sitting there putting you on a range of hands, figuring the implied odds vs. the odds of making his hand, reviewing your previous play, etc.

If you put a big raise on IveyEnvy at PP in a $100 NL game, he is sitting there thinking: does he have it, am I beat, I think this is a good hand, I don't know, maybe I should fold, I need another beer, is this guy any good, maybe I should call, etc.

Or the guy immediately came back all in over the top of you with T8o, because he saw Gus Hansen win a WPT event that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

good comment. i guess we really have to start learning to put our opponents on hands too.

i.e. which poor opponents call to much? which fold too much? which are too aggressive?

you sort of allude to lousy players being unpredictable which is definitely a risk... when does that "folding station" finally decide to fight back?

i'm starting to see excellent poker playing as a big mental, cognitive, "read your opponents", "read his past actions", "read the situation". ULTIMATELY, "READ HIS CARDS" exercise.

and i don't mean that facetiously. i mean it seriously. i'm starting to see that the numbers/odds only take you so far (especially no-limit)

Correct. See, no math.

[ QUOTE ]
Correct. See, no math.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree... although, it's not no math, it's more like the basic math is easy to grasp, so it's somewhat trivial (if you are good with figures)

harrington and yao (and others) get into this intermediate math (they admit it's hard to do at the table) of going through all the possible hands someone could have. i know we all sort of do it, but they try to do it mathematically (although then you have to tie it into position, past actions etc.).

i realize that you'd probably agree with most of this i.e. we're arguing the same thing.

You know, we can just step outside and settle this if you want to.
Okay, that's a joke. I believe the math is much more important in limit than in no-limit. For example, a man UTG opens for a raise. We'll say it's 5-10 NL. So, he raises to 30. Everyone folds to you on the button. You have sixes in the hole. You're 100% sure the man has AA or KK, you know that he will only open UTG with those two hands. That means the pot needs to be laying you, well, I think it's 4-1 to make the call correct. In Nl you still call, because, if you make a set on the flop, most likely you're going to get a lot more than what's currently in the pot, therefore making the call correct.