Is There Any Hope For REAL Poker (i.e. Hold Em Is Killing Us) - Page 7

grandgnu · #61 05-10-2005, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree that Hold 'Em is more a psychological game, while stud is more knowledge regarding odds, paying attention to board cards, etc.

But in my experience, the fish only play NL Hold 'Em because it's extremely easy to pickup and they don't need to think too much or process as much information as they'd need in stud.

I'm not saying Hold Em doesn't require any skill, it also requires logic, understanding odds, probability, position and reading your opponents. I still believe that 7-stud is more complex, and I respect a player who will play more than just NL Hold 'Em.

It's where the money is right now, but back in the day games like 5-stud and redraw games were hot. You have to be able to adjust to the changing times. If you pigeon hole yourself into only one form of poker, and that form dies out, you'll have a harder time adjusting to it's replacement, than if you had taken the time to learn the other poker forms out there.

I'd rather be strong in 1-3 poker game types, and well-rounded in the others, than to just specialize in only one game. I believe Doyle mentions that in his book.

Triumph36 · #62 05-11-2005, 01:03 PM

No one said anything about pigeon-holing. I've read Super System 2 and Ciaffone and Reuben's PL/NL. I've played pot limit Omaha, O/8, 5 stud, 7 stud, etc. Not very much of it, but I've played them enough to know basic strategies. I agree that players should become proficient at all major forms of poker.

But no-limit hold'em is the popular game right now. Casinos don't spread re-draw games and 5 stud because no one would play them now. And Hold 'Em is so popular now that I just can't see new variants of poker arising from anywhere except maybe overseas. These games are often named after places for a reason: they spread outwards from isolated locations. With less and less isolated locations, thanks to television, people are playing the game on television, and that is no limit.

No Limit Hold 'Em is real poker. The tendency to 'play the man, not the cards' is what makes it poker: he with the most knowledge will sometimes not get the most money, it is he with the most ability to read opponents, make value bets and bluffs in the right spots.

Easy E · #63 05-12-2005, 12:27 PM

Do your players need to be taught about the other games?

grandgnu · #64 05-12-2005, 12:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do your players need to be taught about the other games?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've held Omaha hi/lo, 7-stud and stud hi/lo games before. But the Hold 'Em addicts have a terrible time understanding the games. They're worse than crack-addicted monkeys with ADHD, they can't handle anything more complex than worrying about the two cards in their own hand and that's about it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

toots · #65 05-12-2005, 01:27 PM

Oh, now that's just cold.

It does indeed match my experiences, but it's still cold.

Funnier'n crap, needed to be said and well appreciated.

But very cold.

tylerdurden · #66 05-12-2005, 05:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I've held Omaha hi/lo, 7-stud and stud hi/lo games before. But the Hold 'Em addicts have a terrible time understanding the games. They're worse than crack-addicted monkeys with ADHD, they can't handle anything more complex than worrying about the two cards in their own hand and that's about it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're complaining about this??? You want smarter opponents?

TheShootah · #67 05-12-2005, 05:38 PM

I love Stud too, and hate the fact that HE takes away from all the other games, but I in no way shape or form agree with the statement that Omaha is harder than Hold Em. You sit there and wait for an awesome hand. Then you play that hand. If you don't flop the nuts, or a draw to the nuts, you fold. Even the best players agree that O8 is a much easier, boring game than Hold Em. I like the game, and I like Hold Em, but Hold Em is a substantially harder game, especially limit hold em. Please. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Now Stud, I think Stud is harder than everything, but hey, it's all Hold Em nowadays...

grandgnu · #68 05-12-2005, 06:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've held Omaha hi/lo, 7-stud and stud hi/lo games before. But the Hold 'Em addicts have a terrible time understanding the games. They're worse than crack-addicted monkeys with ADHD, they can't handle anything more complex than worrying about the two cards in their own hand and that's about it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're complaining about this??? You want smarter opponents?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all, I just want the dumb opponents to play games where I have an even greater advantage over them. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

tylerdurden · #69 05-12-2005, 07:09 PM

It's going to be easier for you to get better at what the fish want to play than to convince them to play the game you want.

Triumph36 · #70 05-14-2005, 09:22 PM

So you're complaining about variance then.

Again, you haven't said if you're referring to pot limit Omaha or 7-stud, or limit. I think NLHE is much lower variance than both, and more profitable. And yeah, O8 is a far easier game. 7-stud is not particularly complex either.

Fish want action. You want their action. NLHE is an action game. Play NLHE.