|
|
#13
05-30-2005, 10:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
[ QUOTE ]
...I still haven't thought of anything truly witty to say in the chat after I knock him out with J9o. [/ QUOTE ] I believe the answer you're looking for is "checkmate, bitch! holla" 
|
|
#14
05-30-2005, 11:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
When I was playing a lot of limit, I spent quite a bit of time on table selection. It is so easy there, I was always suprised at how little time some players spent on it.
When I moved to playing a lot of 22s, I quickly realized that table selection is futile at the fast pace with which Party SNGs fill up. As I've moved up to playing the 55s, I've been able to get back into it. The most important thing I do is try to identify as many solid multitablers as I can. You can't avoid tables with 1 or 2 of these players on them, but you can work to avoid tables with 3 or more of them. After that, I identify one player through my notes and choose my seat appropriately with respect to their position. That's about as much as I can squeeze in before tables fill, but the time spent has to be +EV. I should add that I 4-table. Trying to practice solid table selection while 8-tabling continuously would be a real bitch.
|
|
#15
05-30-2005, 11:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
I've demonstrated pretty soundly with my own results that you can't take a strong winning strategy to beat $55s into the $109s and make any significant winnings in them. You'll make a few dollars or just break even with a strategy that kills the $55s.
Well, that's relative to what style you play I guess, but it's definitely true for my own. And from reading your stuff I think we play a lot alike. eastbay
|
|
#18
05-31-2005, 12:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
[ QUOTE ]
RAKEBACK BITCH !!! Pwn greenskeepers paystub. Yell SHIP IT. [/ QUOTE ] Greenskeepers' rakeback = Free Green Fees ($275 where I used too work) = pwn3d poker players I was never a greenskeeper, but that seems like a horrible job. P.S. Scuba- Read this month's Cardplayer, it has a section on playing JJ . . . or as I like to call it 'The Scuba Twins' in NL tournaments.
|
|
#19
05-31-2005, 12:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
[ QUOTE ]
Greenskeepers' rakeback = Free Green Fees ($275 where I used too work) = pwn3d poker players [/ QUOTE ] You mean you have to play golf too? Gad, that is a horrible job. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#20
05-31-2005, 12:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 109 at 109, what a waste of time
[ QUOTE ]
Have you adjusted your strategy and improved? [/ QUOTE ] Yep. [ QUOTE ] Optional -$EV question: if so, what changes? [/ QUOTE ] Vague yet probably helpful anyway: I think the biggest thing is simply giving a little more credit in general. Getting out when you're beat. There's a lot less overplaying of TPSK (top pair, [censored] kicker). A lot less overplaying of marginal hands in general, especially early. One more thing is that I got into a slump where I was really hardly even paying attention at all while 4-tabling, mostly web surfing or emailing or working on my program. But you just can't get away with being that sloppy in the $109s and not get hurt by it. Reads start becoming far more important. I'm still working on it, really. eastbay
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
