|
|
#21
08-23-2005, 01:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Will this strategy work in low NL?
Playing at a fullring table this might be mathematically correct, but seems very -EV. What is the point of making it through 25NL if you don't take any addition skills into the next level? Why not just take out a loan if you are confident in your skills at the 50NL tables and if you're not why are you trying to get there?
|
|
#22
08-23-2005, 01:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here is the link for the strategy and arguments for and against
I was just reading the Full Contact forums and I believe it came from Smasharoo's post
http://fullcontactpoker.com/poker-fo...ic.php?t=24661 It is an interesting read. The actual strategy is the Monday 3:01 post on page 2. Smasharoo insists this strategy beats everything. He more or less challenges people to post 20k hands using this strategy vs 20k hands using their own play. Many from 2+2 will laugh hard at some of the posts... One funny post from a skeptic. Setting aside your obvious God complex, my reasoning is much more sound than saying your system works cause it worked a few times for you and some others. What is your sample size? Smasharoo responds.... 700,000 hands. Thanks for playing. What's your winrate at NL, by the way?
|
|
#23
08-23-2005, 11:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here is the link for the strategy and arguments for and against
Ed Millers strategy seems to have some key differences. He lists some hands to play that don't have good nut potential.
I Also don't agree with the low buy-in. This limits how many hands you can play and limits how much you make when you do get the cards. Smasharoo's strategy is a bit different than mine. He says to go all-in preflop with AA or KK. I think you should atleast see the flop first before moving in for the kill. It's kinda hard to determine by the posts from fullcontact if this really works that well. Some of the people claim it makes alot others says its worthless but most are just bickering over nonsense and egos. If I had the extra money I would be in pokerroom.com right now multitableing this 4-6hrs but it would cost me most of my bankroll. I could try one table but I think it would be very slow. If anyone has tryed multitableing this system please post the results.
|
|
#24
08-23-2005, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here is the link for the strategy and arguments for and against
One guy claims he has 10-15 bots using this strategy.
Smasharoo claims 700k hands but I'm not sure what his win rate is. Seems that this is just tight aggressive taken to the ultimate extreme. I would think that decent players would pick up on this very quickly as some in the thread argued, but Smasharoo's point is that the tables constantly have donk's that pay you off. Seems a modified version of this would be best and I'm sure Smasharoo is holding stuff back.
|
|
#25
08-23-2005, 03:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here is the link for the strategy and arguments for and against
I experimented with this system (smasharoo's approach) for 7k hands and doubled my normal win rate (over 30k hands using normal TA play) at the NL50 tables on party poker. My win rate jumped from ~4ptBB/100 to ~10ptBB/100.
Small sample set and maybe just positive variance using the system, but still kinda sad. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
