The tyranny of the majority (long)

[fnord_too]

It's late, and I don't have time or alertness for a good response here, so I'll just ramble a little instead.

Truly novel ideas rarely get much discussion unless they are posted by people who have an army of sychophants. That's one of the reasons these posters are so valuable, because their name alone can get a good discussion going.

After the first couple of levels of a sit and go you are playing short stack no limit, which does not allow the creativity of deep stack NL. Even in the first couple of round you are only playing medium stack NL. Those levels are the most interesting to me, after that the game quickly degrades into exploiting big preflop weaknesses and not making pre-flop mistakes. For the play of medium to deep stack NL, read the NL forums. They get some very good discussion there. Even though a lot of players don't post 'interesting' hands (to them) because they don't want to give too much away, 'interesting' is a very relative term. Honestly, there is not a whole lot that is interesting in STT's. Your decision space is just too small, and the consequences of mis steps just too great.

The exception to the above is psychology. I would highly recomend reading Tversky and Khaneman's work. I'd type more but I really need to sleep. (It'll be interesting to read this tomorrow when I am reasonbly coherant.)

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
That being said, doing that is only necessary because of 2+2's moderation policy being so lenient with posters. If they made three or four additional moderators and let them remove OT posts and ban posters this would all likely be a non-issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last thing I want to see is banning OT posts. Come on, have a sense of humor, folks. A little OT chat makes this place feel more like a community.

That being said, and perhaps paradoxically, I'd be all for banning people who act like schmucks. I think a no-[censored] policy would be a good thing. I'd be sorry to see Adanthar go, but you want to make an omelet, you have to crack some eggs. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
Good post atticus. I agree with a lot of what you said.

One thing that I think you misunderstand: When you are looking at a push/fold situation, it is pretty much a pure math play. The fact that you look like you are on tilt and/or have pushed the last 4 hands DOES matter. You just adjust the calling ranges of your opponents and re-evaluate.

[/ QUOTE ]


Of course. I even alluded to that in my OP. I was trying to find a quantitative way of analyzing table image. Something along the lines of measuring calls/push (over a LONG period of time.)

It's somewhat ironic that the so-called fuzzy discussions that some folks pooh-pooh here can lead to further technical knowledge and techniques, and that's part of my point. We can refine the math by delving more into these issues. Probability theory is all about information. If you ignore information at your disposal, such as table image, your calculated expected values will be incorrect.

[ QUOTE ]

There really shouldn't be too much need for discussing it further, except for maybe talking about how opponents adjust their calling ranges depending on prior hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think that's a short discussion, I beg to differ. That's a sticky wicket if I ever saw one. Exactly when should you decide you're pushing "too much" and cool it for a while? Right now, I do this entirely based on "feel."

In any case this particular issue was only an example of a larger trend I see here.

[ QUOTE ]

But yeah, other than that, feel free to start any concept/non-standard posts that you wish to discuss. If you feel you aren't getting the responses you wanted, PM me and I'll respond in the thread with some thought behind it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alrighty then. Now I just have to think of something intelligent to say. See you in about a month [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Holla.

If people don't want to educate that's their decision. There are still a number of high level players who contribute poker content, a couple that come to mind immediately are curtains, adanthar and chrisv and they're far from the only ones. I also think there's much to be learned from some who play at lower levels.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
If people don't want to educate that's their decision. There are still a number of high level players who contribute poker content, a couple that come to mind immediately are curtains, adanthar and chrisv and they're far from the only ones. I also think there's much to be learned from some who play at lower levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

But Adanthar is so smelly. Sure, he's better at Poker than I am, but when it comes to personal hygeine, I pwn him.

Sigh, I still remember the days when I would tell Adanthar over a couple of beers that he ought to quit playing limit and give NL SNGs a try. Now he's a NL master of the universe. Blew past me like a Bostonian through Kansas on his way to San Francisco.

I'll catch up yet, though, dammit.

[Nicholasp27]

very nice post and i completely agree

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing that might be interesting is discussing one of the Mini-step 5s that was posted earlier. In that post, there was a player who went by PokerIdiot (not the OP), who in the early part of the game played super laggy. Anyway, his style I thought was very effective early, but ineffective late. Is it not possible to adapt to that early style, and switch to my normal style late? Perhaps what I'm saying doesn't make much sense in the $33s, but I would think in the higher levels, like $109s or $215s+, this might be a very +CEV strategy. Wish I could find that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

PokerIdiot HH

[Nicholasp27]

link says 'forbidden'

[ QUOTE ]
If you think that's a short discussion, I beg to differ. That's a sticky wicket if I ever saw one. Exactly when should you decide you're pushing "too much" and cool it for a while? Right now, I do this entirely based on "feel."

[/ QUOTE ]<disclaimer>My experience is entirely in the low limit games</disclaimer>, but I think you are right to do his by feel rather than by formula. Individuals' perceptions of what "too much" is is going to vary greatly, even at the same table. If the SB folds to you in the BB when you hold 62, this will probably stick in your mind more than if he folded to your Qx. And, will stick in a whole different manner than if he folded to your AK.

If someone pushes 3-4 times against me and every time the decision is easy, it's probably not going to effect me the same way it would if the decisions had been difficult. And, even if you know what cards the other person has, you're probably not going to have the same opinion about whether the decisions were easy as the other guy does (remember, this is low stakes).

[pooh74]

I havent read any replies yet, but good post atticus.

Let me just say that, as I see it, if I am not playing continuously and playing sets, If I have only one going, I have an incredibly high ROI on that one table. Being able to concentrate on how you are perceived and really putting yourself in your opponents' heads is huge.

I think this forum does do a good job actually of acknowledging this however.

A great example is pushing 2- 3hands in a row and then folding A9 or something at high blinds...I mean, geez, If A9 were the first of those hands it would be an insta push. Im not giving any details, but you get the picture...