|
|
#12
08-23-2005, 06:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
Where is that gimmick account, Cliffs Notes? [/ QUOTE ] You're the only poster I know wouldn't read this whole thing, but luckily you're one of the few posters who doesn't have to. 
|
|
#13
08-23-2005, 06:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] (For a better explanation of this statement, read feeney's 2+2 book "Inside the Poker Mind," which -- while not perfect ... [/ QUOTE ] Not true. It's perfect. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I agree. And when are you going to write another book?
|
|
#14
08-23-2005, 09:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
You start to slip in judgment, and you're now subtly on tilt. Most players think if they're not steaming, they're not on tilt. Not true. Maybe the next hand you open-limp Axs in EP even though it's not a profitable play on your table, just because it has potential to win a big pot and you might see a cheap flop multi-way. This is -EV. Couple that with getting tied to a hand post-flop, and it's now more -EV. Was all of this worth pushing an edge that may or may not have existed when you chose the previous line? I don't think so. [/ QUOTE ] The part above totally describes what happens to me. I go on a very subtle form of tilt just as described above. If you were here next to me, and you were not a guy... I think I would kiss you. I was thinking about this stuff on the way to work this morning. Good post
|
|
#15
08-23-2005, 09:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] (For a better explanation of this statement, read feeney's 2+2 book "Inside the Poker Mind," which -- while not perfect ... [/ QUOTE ] Not true. It's perfect. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I'd just like to say that I only read this whole post because John Feeney responded.
|
|
#16
08-23-2005, 09:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] (For a better explanation of this statement, read feeney's 2+2 book "Inside the Poker Mind," which -- while not perfect ... [/ QUOTE ] Not true. It's perfect. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] lol you got him on tilt [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
|
|
#18
08-23-2005, 10:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
I personally love to see long well-thought posts, regardless of which forum they are in. I have been criticised elsewhere for being too long-winded in some/many of my posts, which I guess is what happens when you try to explore a subject in-depth or want to move beyond simple colour-by-numbers responses.
What I really do not like is people skim-reading then making facile responses... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] The advice you give regarding avoiding marginal high-variance plays is spot-on but, it may not just apply to those developing in the game. Someone playing for a living who absolutely needs to put in a winning month may opt to play a lower variance game (be that by table selection or hand-selection), i.e. accept a slightly lower return but with a more reliable outcome. Much like yellow jersey on the final leg of the Tour-de-France would like to win, but finishing (anywhere in the leading pack) is far more important. Few posts made on this forum come with a "high-variance warning" so it may be difficult for newer players to actually know the ins and outs of Play A versus Play B, when both are profitable or one is small win versus big loss etc. So, how do we know which plays are high-variance when learning the game? As for the definition "subtle-tilt", I think that recognising this, controlling it and playing correctly will do far more for your WR than pushing small edges to increment your WR by 0.1-0.2 BB/100. What makes Feeney's book so good is that for much of the book this is its primary focus while not being an out-and-out Schoonmaker psychoanalysis. I like the term "subtle-tilt" for its descriptiveness but it is a cumbersome term too easily confused with "steaming" tilt. We really need to call it something else - for some reason the word "crepitation" comes to mind. Like the sound of thin ice cracking underfoot, we could be swallowed up by the abyss at any moment...(the ice thing also helps to separate it from "steaming" or other "hot" definitions of tilt). Probably too many syllables... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] Suggestions? [ QUOTE ] our overall goal...is winning the most money in the long term. We achieve this goal by maximizing our winrate... [/ QUOTE ] This is certainly NOT true for BB/100, most understand that multi-tabling will reduce our WR in BB/100 but actually wins more money. It may not even be true for WR/Hr as we can always play MORE HOURS at a lower WR in order to win more $$. This is especially true if we find it easy to win, for example, 2.5 BB/Hr playing in reasonably easy games/lower limit and can play long sessions comfortably, as opposed to really having to concentrate very hard to win 1.5 BB/Hr in more aggressive higher-limit games, and consequently only being able to play for shorter periods due to burn out. How many burnt-out poker players are there who played real fast for a few years and have stopped playing? The player who plays part-time for 40 years wins a shed-load more $$. Your post neatly puts psychology and strategy in the same basket, and rightly so. But if strategy is the right hand of God, then psychology is the left hand.
|
|
#19
08-23-2005, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
I like the term "subtle-tilt" for its descriptiveness but it is a cumbersome term too easily confused with "steaming" tilt. We really need to call it something else - for some reason the word "crepitation" comes to mind. Like the sound of thin ice cracking underfoot, we could be swallowed up by the abyss at any moment...(the ice thing also helps to separate it from "steaming" or other "hot" definitions of tilt). Probably too many syllables... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] Suggestions? [/ QUOTE ] I've got it. By George, I've got it. If we don't call it "tilt" or "subtle tilt," how about we call it.... lean. You're not totally tilting, you're just leaning. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
#20
08-23-2005, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: On small edges and self-defeating lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I like the term "subtle-tilt" for its descriptiveness but it is a cumbersome term too easily confused with "steaming" tilt. We really need to call it something else - for some reason the word "crepitation" comes to mind. Like the sound of thin ice cracking underfoot, we could be swallowed up by the abyss at any moment...(the ice thing also helps to separate it from "steaming" or other "hot" definitions of tilt). Probably too many syllables... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] Suggestions? [/ QUOTE ] I've got it. By George, I've got it. If we don't call it "tilt" or "subtle tilt," how about we call it.... lean. You're not totally tilting, you're just leaning. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I've been "leaning" for the last week. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Right now I am leaning towards playing a week of 2/4LO8 to clear my head.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
