Agree/Disagree

[Karak567]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that it is your objective to not get all of your chips in the pot unless you are sure you have the winning hand. SURE you have the winning hand. The object is not to go all in with AQ preflop with 750 chips when the blinds are at 50/100

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do not want to be called by AQ or JT, then you make me sad and you REALLY need to evaluate how you play SNGs.

I highly doubt that you are a winning player.

[pokerlaw]

in general, generalized statements like this suck.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
Your friend sucks at SNGs, then.

7 k over 2 years?

lol, yeah, impressive stats bud.

There are guys that pull that in a week here.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much he's made is irrelevant. How many he's played and how much he's made says more. Has he played 1000 10+1s or 5000 20+2s? Point is, given his statements, he has a lot to learn. And I don't want to hear any of this bcrap about different ways of playing being profitable. I mean, yeah, sure...but within reason.

[Karak567]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your friend sucks at SNGs, then.

7 k over 2 years?

lol, yeah, impressive stats bud.

There are guys that pull that in a week here.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much he's made is irrelevant. How many he's played and how much he's made says more. Has he played 1000 10+1s or 5000 20+2s? Point is, given his statements, he has a lot to learn. And I don't want to hear any of this bcrap about different ways of playing being profitable. I mean, yeah, sure...but within reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I just find it funny when people think they are throwing their e-peen around, when really, in reality, their e-peen is quite small.

I have 700 chips at 50/100 blinds with TT. I am in MP. It is folded to me. I.. don't push?!?

Disagree.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$7,000/2yrs or $7,000/730 days = $9.59 a day. Your playing for lunch money?

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, it's not a bad result for a hobby. Ask people who play golf or ski as a hobby what their +/- is for the last 2 years. I'm pretty sure our boy here has them crushed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a college student, and play when i can. I am by no means the best player i know, but i'm always interested in getting better. I feel, and have always felt that the strategy of trying to avoid all ins unnecessarily is a winning one. I'm not playing for 5 hours a day every day. I take breaks of weeks at a time. 7k over 2 years has helped to finance a lot of my college activities.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$7,000/2yrs or $7,000/730 days = $9.59 a day. Your playing for lunch money?

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, it's not a bad result for a hobby. Ask people who play golf or ski as a hobby what their +/- is for the last 2 years. I'm pretty sure our boy here has them crushed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a college student, and play when i can. I am by no means the best player i know, but i'm always interested in getting better. I feel, and have always felt that the strategy of trying to avoid all ins unnecessarily is a winning one. I'm not playing for 5 hours a day every day. I take breaks of weeks at a time. 7k over 2 years has helped to finance a lot of my college activities.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless, if, as you say, you are winning player playing this way, the only debate is how much MORE you could make by realizing this assertion is wrong.

I am not calling you a liar for saying you are winning...I am only saying you are definitely not maximizing your overall EV by sticking to this principle.

[tjh]

You know what I think...

I think we need to be clearer about why we do what we do.

The push strategy works in the mid to late game because they fold too much. If they did not fold too much then we would have to exploit some other mistake they make.

So in order to keep these "other strategies" from popping up it would help if we were clear about why our strategy works.

Our strategy works because the other players play too loose in the beginning and too tight in the middle and end. We can gain any ground that we lose by tight play in the beginning by being aggressive later on.

Suppose we sat down at a table of 2+2ers... Well then another strategy is likely to be optimal. I would say that we have a tendency to play tight early and this could be exploited. But...as long as there are fish in the sea we do not have to worry about that.

You know what also might apply to the original poster...
His definition of the nuts might be a little broad. He may support pushing with a broader range of hands than we think he is claiming. A lot of folks think that the semi-nuts are the nuts. He may be mis-stating a basic "be tight early" policy.

--
Tjh

[FlyWf]

How much or how little you make is entirely irrelevant. I've made more money from poker than you, does that make me magically right? Nope. What makes me right is: Anything but openpushing AQ with 7.5 BB is very, very, very bad(outside of a handful of extreme bubble situations). In the 800 chip games you're going to have a <10BB stack at level 4 an awful lot. As you won't be able to fold into the money and there's no guarantee of picking up aces in the remaining 25 hands of the tourney, you will need to push repeatedly, often with relatively crappy hands.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
You know what I think...

I think we need to be clearer about why we do what we do.

The push strategy works in the mid to late game because they fold too much. If they did not fold too much then we would have to exploit some other mistake they make.

So in order to keep these "other strategies" from popping up it would help if we were clear about why our strategy works.

Our strategy works because the other players play too loose in the beginning and too tight in the middle and end. We can gain any ground that we lose by tight play in the beginning by being aggressive later on.

Suppose we sat down at a table of 2+2ers... Well then another strategy is likely to be optimal. I would say that we have a tendency to play tight early and this could be exploited. But...as long as there are fish in the sea we do not have to worry about that.

You know what also might apply to the original poster...
His definition of the nuts might be a little broad. He may support pushing with a broader range of hands than we think he is claiming. A lot of folks think that the semi-nuts are the nuts. He may be mis-stating a basic "be tight early" policy.

--
Tjh

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever...He is ignoring the important concept of FE and how much EV that adds to your hand in a multitude of situations (before the blinds are 100-200 etc...). W/o getting into semantics over what constitutes "the nuts" we can already surmise that his style is inherently "wrong", meaning, that he is missing out on adding expected value.