Is There Any Hope For REAL Poker (i.e. Hold Em Is Killing Us) - Page 6

mosta · #51 05-02-2005, 01:29 AM

you want to nut peddle in omaha-8 and memorize board cards in stud. you prefer games with more information open and less variability (more predictability in winning hand values). what it sounds like to me is that actually hold em is too hard for you. jamming locks against donkeys is not "REAL" poker. it takes skill and certain qualities to make a living off small edges, limited information, and high variance. I advise you not to go near heads up limit hold em. (I don't know if no-limit's even tougher.)

grandgnu · #52 05-02-2005, 07:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you want to nut peddle in omaha-8 and memorize board cards in stud. you prefer games with more information open and less variability (more predictability in winning hand values). what it sounds like to me is that actually hold em is too hard for you. jamming locks against donkeys is not "REAL" poker. it takes skill and certain qualities to make a living off small edges, limited information, and high variance. I advise you not to go near heads up limit hold em. (I don't know if no-limit's even tougher.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe the majority of pro's will tell you: if you can master 7-stud, you can master them all. It requires additional skills that would not be applied in a game like Hold 'Em. I enjoy Hold 'Em, and do well at it. But I hate the negative impact Hold 'Em has had on other games (i.e. everyone and their brother will only play Hold 'Em and not give the other games a chance)

BarronVangorToth · #53 05-02-2005, 10:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and high variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you believe that Hold 'em has more variance than Seven Card Stud? If so, why?

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

toots · #54 05-02-2005, 11:00 AM

Hold 'Em is a nice game for those who don't want to take the time to learn how to play poker.

(Pulling pin, running away, ducking down, covering ears)

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

grandgnu · #55 05-02-2005, 01:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hold 'Em is a nice game for those who don't want to take the time to learn how to play poker.

(Pulling pin, running away, ducking down, covering ears)

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh heh, exactly. I honestly believe that stud and omaha require more knowledge and skill than Hold 'Em. Someone saying that Hold 'em is too "hard" for me is way off. I just prefer a game where I can have a larger edge over my less-observant opponents, and thus have an opportunity to win more money.

Hold 'Em is more guessing while a game like 7-stud provides you with more information. There's still guessing involved, but if you are a player who takes the time to keep track you can boost your edge because of the information available. Why wouldn't I want to have that edge?

Golem47 · #56 05-06-2005, 10:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hold 'Em is a nice game for those who don't want to take the time to learn how to play poker.

(Pulling pin, running away, ducking down, covering ears)

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree hold-em is killing poker. I like to call it the 9-ball of poker. Great for TV with big action and fast play but the real pro's play sraight pool. So when the trend is over and the game gets so popular that you can't get a seat without registering a year in advance (like NASCAR CUP tickets) people will be forced play other games and those of us that took the time to learn them now will clean up in the long run. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Chimera · #57 05-08-2005, 07:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
So when the trend is over and the game gets so popular that you can't get a seat without registering a year in advance ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, when the game gets so popular that you have to register a year in advance, that will be a clear sign that the trend is over ... kind of like when a restaurant gets so crowded that no one goes there anymore. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Triumph36 · #58 05-10-2005, 12:53 PM

You say Stud and Omaha require more knowledge and skill than Hold 'Em.

I think you're equating knowledge and skill. While Stud and Omaha require better knowledge of mathematics, outs, and so on, Hold 'Em is the ultimate psychological game. In Stud, a player can often tell when he is good based on folded cards, and in Omaha, if you don't have the nuts or if you're not drawing to the nuts, you're probably making a mistake. In Hold 'Em there's a lot less information, and a player rarely gets the nuts. There are far more marginal situations in No Limit Hold 'Em. I still contend that knowing when to bet the river in NLHE is the most difficult decision in poker.

toots · #59 05-10-2005, 01:16 PM

I remember an old saying that anyone who says he's a writer probably isn't one. That reflects the number of people who are in love with the idea of being a writer, but who either don't want to do the work or lack the skill.

I'm starting to feel the same way about people who say they're poker players, but who only play HE, particularly NLHE.

grandgnu · #60 05-10-2005, 02:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I remember an old saying that anyone who says he's a writer probably isn't one. That reflects the number of people who are in love with the idea of being a writer, but who either don't want to do the work or lack the skill.

I'm starting to feel the same way about people who say they're poker players, but who only play HE, particularly NLHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually they're there to "gamboool" and want to play hands like 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and pray for a magic flop to justify their overplaying marginal hands. They can't help but to bluff and overplay marginal hands, etc.

They don't want to take the time to learn pot odds, position or pay attention to their opponents (or board cards in a game like stud)

Works for me, more money in my pocket. Just sucks because I've had to dump all of my stud and omaha home games and just go with NL Hold 'Em because that's all the fish want to play. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]