Why SS is not as good as it could have been (rant content)

[TripleH68]

[ QUOTE ]
This one-liner thing has been discussed a lot and a lot of reasonable people think that saying "easy 3-bet" and then having others think about why is a better learning tool than spoon-feeding. No one is discouraged from asking why, and no one is ignored when they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree entirely. Do you see why?

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You suck at poker. If you had been good you would have played higher!


[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of possible rebuttals to this but let me just throw out an illustration for what is worth. Player 1 and Play 2 each play Party $3/6. Player 1 is in college and her parents pay all of her tuition and costs. Player 1 beats the game for 1BB/100 but rolls all winnings into her bankroll so she can move up. Player 2 multitables the $3/6 game as a living and supports a family. He beats the game for 2.75BB/100 and maintains an adequate roll for the game after paying living expenses. He builds his roll but it goes slowly due to all of his expenses.

After a year, Player 2 is still at $3/6 but thinks he may dip inot the $5/10 game when it looks particularly juicy. Player 1 decides to jump into the Party $15/30 game since she has the roll and she hears it is stocked with fish and that she can likely beat the game for at least a little. Is Player 1 better than Player 2. She is now officialy a "$15/30 player" unlike Player 2, who is still "stuck" at $3/6.

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize this, I know some very good players that play low, and some bad ones that play high [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. It is the "I beat 2/4 or 3/6-so I am good at this game" -mentality that I tried to attack because it keeps players in place, blocking progress.

[lerxst337]

While the approach of your argument likely could have been better (I have no doubt that even many of the posters here who often have approaches I disagree with, they are still winning players, and I would not necessarily like to have them at MY table), I do agree with you in heart.

Alot of the advice given here seems to run into the loose-aggressive category. Many--actually, I edit that to just a few-- posters here seem to wish for narrow positive equity situations, and in otherwise ambiguous circumstances through caution to the wind and shout RAISE! While this tendancy is the hallmark of a top-notch player, I often wonder if I always took the advice in this forum, my stats would look something like 32/12.3/3.2.

More importantly, I would like to see more discussion sometimes, even for "easy" decision. Bad players like myself and arnfinn like the reinforcing of "raise for equity value" or "raise for position" that many posters use here. If it is a narrow equity situation, explain why you believe you have equity, even if you only have 12 outs twice heads up.

In short, sometimes the short 3 word answer, even if straight forward and easy, is not at all useful to the learning player.

I do like the idea of not offering ALL of your reasoning at once, but I don't see the reasoning behind the three word answer to prompt other discussion--shouldn't the question do that by itself?

In general, the discussion here is very good, and the posters in general don't flame those they disagree with (although I did have one poster imply that I never played poker before because my post was "so just wrong."). But the OP's view is not unique.

[Hass]

AMEN. I think of my self as a pretty decent player but only have a bankroll to play 6/12 at the most. i hate when people say things like "if you were good you would play higher" when i get the roll i will play higher.

[LinusKS]

When you're between the ages of 15 and 18, you know everything. Which is why there are so many confident posters here.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
When you're between the ages of 15 and 18, you know everything. Which is why there are so many confident posters here.

[/ QUOTE ]

To lighten up this thread a bit your statement reminds me of something our very good Physics-teacher said to our class when we were 17:

"If you think you will feel smarter when you learn more you are wrong. The more you learn, the more you realize that you don't know since you touch into more and more areas in which you know very little."

I think his words applies good for poker too. You notice on the wording of posters if they are just putting out a confident statement since they don't understand the complexity or if they are seriously considering the factors in place.

[KDawgCometh]

if you'd seen sfer's poll then you'd know why the age statement you just made is wrong

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
..... No one is discouraged from asking why, and no one is ignored when they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, simply untrue.

Many of the posters that do the short one liners, never come back to the thread.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
..... No one is discouraged from asking why, and no one is ignored when they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, simply untrue.

Many of the posters that do the short one liners, never come back to the thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but other people figure it out

[Klepton]

thank you for cleaning up the forums