Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Books and Publications
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-06-2005, 06:58 PM
dark_horse dark_horse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 256
Default I disagree with Doyle.

In the early part of the No Limit Hold'em section of Super/System 2, Doyle writes, "if I win ten pots where nobody has a big hand, ten pots with let's say $3,000 in them, I can afford to take 2 to 1 the worst of it and play a $30,000 pot. I've already got that pot covered thanks to all the small pots I've picked up. And when I play that big pot, it's a freeroll."

Does anyone else see a problem with this statement? It's not a freeroll. Once you've won the money in earlier pots, that's your money. If you're taking the worst of it in a big pot (or any pot), you're making a -EV play. The only upside I can see is how it affects your image for future hands. Am I missing the point?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:00 PM
felson felson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 182
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

Doyle isn't making ten steals and then throwing away his money on the eleventh pot. He's making eleven steals. Ten of them are successful, and one of them is going to showdown. The other ten pay for the showdown hand.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:11 PM
SNOWBALL138 SNOWBALL138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 518
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

I had trouble with this originally too, but then I realized that Doyle is taking 2-1 the worst of it when called on all of his steals. Of course, he doesn't know that he will or won't be called on any of these steals individually, but he knows that the times that he is successful will counterbalance the times that he isn't.

Its not as though he thinks to himself "I just won a bunch of money. Now I am going to go blow it on a bonehead play"
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:13 PM
Chairman Wood Chairman Wood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ann Arbor
Posts: 119
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

I thought something very similar when I read it. I think you are correct.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:30 PM
dark_horse dark_horse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 256
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

[ QUOTE ]
I had trouble with this originally too, but then I realized that Doyle is taking 2-1 the worst of it when called on all of his steals. Of course, he doesn't know that he will or won't be called on any of these steals individually, but he knows that the times that he is successful will counterbalance the times that he isn't.

Its not as though he thinks to himself "I just won a bunch of money. Now I am going to go blow it on a bonehead play"

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I guess the point is that since he doesn't know which flop steal attempt will get called, there better be a turn card that gives him a draw (if he didn't already have one) for him to continue to play the hand aggressively. But I guess two overcards like AK isn't considered to be a drawing hand on a ragged flop.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:35 PM
trdi trdi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 167
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

What? I don't understand your first statement. You know, Doyle doesn't play in games we play. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] If someone plays back after his steal attempt, that's an all-in situation.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-06-2005, 07:43 PM
dark_horse dark_horse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 256
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

[ QUOTE ]
What? I don't understand your first statement. You know, Doyle doesn't play in games we play. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] If someone plays back after his steal attempt, that's an all-in situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

yep.. and that's why i find reading his material a bit dangerous for a beginning small stakes NL player such as myself. (1/2 and below) i'm about to buy Mastering No-Limit Hold'em by Russell Fox. it comes highly recommended from my successful small stakes NL friends. do we like this book?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-06-2005, 10:19 PM
Jeff W Jeff W is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 85
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

Shania

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-06-2005, 10:45 PM
maurile maurile is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 95
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-06-2005, 10:59 PM
Shaman Shaman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 53
Default Re: I disagree with Doyle.

Think of the 10 pots and the 2 to 1 the worst of it for a 30,000 pot as one bet.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.