One thing I've noticed...

[Cased Heel]

People are posting tons of hands where they make a questionable call on the river for a large amount of money.

People... RAISE PRE-FLOP WITH GOOD HANDS. I'm tired of seeing people check in the BB with TT when 4 people limp! This tells you NOTHING.

THEN, they get involved in the hand and they can't get away from it because they have NO READ on any opponent.

THIS IS WHY YOU RAISE QUALITY HOLDINGS. STOP GETTING CUTESY WITH POCKET TENS AND BIG SLICK. I repeat, THIS IS WHY YOU RAISE QUALITY HOLDINGS.

Every time I read a post about someone's "tough decision on the turn", I'm finding that their mistakes were made PREFLOP and ON THE FLOP. The EFFING turn has nothing to do with their true problem!

I'm not as angry as I sound but people need to realize they have to protect their hand.

A good exercise would be to find the lowest level NL 6-max table possible and RAISE EVERY HAND. See how different this is. See how much information you acquire. Then when you feel comfortable raising TT with 4 limpers, you can move back to "your level".

Does anyone else see this problem?

[jkkkk]

No, who made you the SSNL police anyway?

[Ghazban]

OP actually has a point here but its not one that is solved simply by raising preflop. Many posts on this board ask about a later street decision that could've been made easier by playing earlier streets differently. Most commonly, a person has an awkward stack size on the turn or river when a scary card hits. Had they bet more of their stack before that happened, they'd be committed and it wouldn't matter what cards fell; had they bet less, they would have enough room to bet and fold to a raise. Another is that they'll check a strong holding (like a set) on the flop in an unraised pot and then not be able to get all their money in by the river. The problem there isn't the turn or river bets; its that they never got the pot built up to a point where somebody else is willing to put a lot of money in.

[Cased Heel]

[ QUOTE ]
OP actually has a point here but its not one that is solved simply by raising preflop. Many posts on this board ask about a later street decision that could've been made easier by playing earlier streets differently. Most commonly, a person has an awkward stack size on the turn or river when a scary card hits. Had they bet more of their stack before that happened, they'd be committed and it wouldn't matter what cards fell; had they bet less, they would have enough room to bet and fold to a raise. Another is that they'll check a strong holding (like a set) on the flop in an unraised pot and then not be able to get all their money in by the river. The problem there isn't the turn or river bets; its that they never got the pot built up to a point where somebody else is willing to put a lot of money in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, a good play on the river means nothing if you haven't played PF, the flop, and the turn just as well or better. In other words, you are only as good as your worst betting round.

If you are great PF, on the flop, and on the turn, but are awful on the river, then you are awful.

If you are awful PF, but great post-flop, you are awful. You cannot have ANY leaks on ANY street. So many people are missing the point.

Once you've mastered PF starting hands, then I think you can master the flop, then the turn, then the river. This is due to the fact that you'll inherently see many more hands at each previous street, therefore more opportunities to PRACTICE yet at the same time more opportunities to FOUL UP.

Take a look at how many hands you see a showdown with compared to how many you see PF (all hands dealt to you). This should clarify how much more important it is to play well PRE FLOP compared to on the river.

Mistakes on the river are about 1/5th as bad as mistakes PF.

EDIT: I'm often reminded of this when I see someone say "I made a great laydown on the turn"

Well gee, Carl, had you played better pre-flop and on the flop, this "great laydown" would have never came to fruition! A great laydown is M E A N I N G L E S S if you could have won the pot with better play on previous streets. Meaningless. We're here to win $, not pots.

[TrailofTears]

[ QUOTE ]
you are only as good as your worst betting round.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most useful thing you have had to say in this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
If you are awful PF, but great post-flop, you are awful. You cannot have ANY leaks on ANY street. So many people are missing the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is plain wrong. This only makes sense if you are playing people of equal or greater skill than you. Lots of players at higher levels are capable of playing more hands than a novice or intermediate player, outplaying them postflop. Experience, reads, and the like are crucial to this though, and your point does hold more credibility in SSNL, but certainly not for all players.

[ QUOTE ]
This is due to the fact that you'll inherently see many more hands at each previous street, therefore more opportunities to PRACTICE yet at the same time more opportunities to FOUL UP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I recant my first statement - this is also a very good point.

[ QUOTE ]
Mistakes on the river are at least 5 times worse than mistakes PF.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to assume you meant the opposite, no?

[ QUOTE ]
Well gee, Carl, had you played better pre-flop and on the flop, this "great laydown" would have never came to fruition! A great laydown is M E A N I N G L E S S if you could have won the pot with better play on previous streets. Meaningless. We're here to win $, not pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement contradicts itself more times than I would like to comment on. And for the love of all that is holy, what do you have against Carl? He's trying his frickin' best.

-T

p.s. Your OP also has a lot of errors in logic in it. For example, it is not always advantageous to raise PF with AK or TT PF when you have four callers in the SB or BB. This builds a big pot, and you DON'T find out any information when you get called, despite what you might claim. Not in SSNL games. Also, contrary to what you have said a couple times in this thread, you can't force a win in a pot, and correspondingly, you can't make other players respect your PF raise with AK. Hell, I'll call you if I have position with more hands than you would consider "solid", though not as many as Richie Rich would, or whoever started that similar "call with any two" thread.

Okay, I'm really done now. Replies always appreciated, good or bad, but I learn more from the criticizing of my posts than the praise.

[Cased Heel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you are only as good as your worst betting round.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most useful thing you have had to say in this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
If you are awful PF, but great post-flop, you are awful. You cannot have ANY leaks on ANY street. So many people are missing the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is plain wrong. This only makes sense if you are playing people of equal or greater skill than you. Lots of players at higher levels are capable of playing more hands than a novice or intermediate player, outplaying them postflop. Experience, reads, and the like are crucial to this though, and your point does hold more credibility in SSNL, but certainly not for all players.

[ QUOTE ]
This is due to the fact that you'll inherently see many more hands at each previous street, therefore more opportunities to PRACTICE yet at the same time more opportunities to FOUL UP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I recant my first statement - this is also a very good point.

[ QUOTE ]
Mistakes on the river are at least 5 times worse than mistakes PF.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to assume you meant the opposite, no?

[ QUOTE ]
Well gee, Carl, had you played better pre-flop and on the flop, this "great laydown" would have never came to fruition! A great laydown is M E A N I N G L E S S if you could have won the pot with better play on previous streets. Meaningless. We're here to win $, not pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement contradicts itself more times than I would like to comment on. And for the love of all that is holy, what do you have against Carl? He's trying his frickin' best.

-T

p.s. Your OP also has a lot of errors in logic in it. For example, it is not always advantageous to raise PF with AK or TT PF when you have four callers in the SB or BB. This builds a big pot, and you DON'T find out any information when you get called, despite what you might claim. Not in SSNL games. Also, contrary to what you have said a couple times in this thread, you can't force a win in a pot, and correspondingly, you can't make other players respect your PF raise with AK. Hell, I'll call you if I have position with more hands than you would consider "solid", though not as many as Richie Rich would, or whoever started that similar "call with any two" thread.

Okay, I'm really done now. Replies always appreciated, good or bad, but I learn more from the criticizing of my posts than the praise.

[/ QUOTE ]

To your first comment: Thanks
2nd comment: By "awful" I mean "have a great amount of room to improve". I'm assuming everyone on here wants to play as well as possible, no?

3rd comment: No comment.
4th comment: Yes, I wrote it backwards and edited it right away. You must have responded very quickly to this! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

5th comment: I disagree. What is the point of letting a hand get away from you? It's clearly better to win a 12BB pot than to let a 25BB pot get away from your control. A "great laydown" is not a "great play" if it could have been avoided by better quality previous play.

Last comment: I'm not saying "always" raise these hands. But as far as the people who I'm talking about...it just seems like it would do them a great deal of good to master the art of the PF raise before a costly foul-up at the turn.

Thanks for a quality criticism. Finally I found someone I can actually carry on a conversation with.

[swolfe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mistakes on the river are at least 5 times worse than mistakes PF.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to assume you meant the opposite, no?

[/ QUOTE ]
no, decisions on later streets are exponentially more important than the earlier decisions since that's how the pot grows.

[srm80]

maybe you should write a small stakes NLHE book and publish it through 2 + 2? Or, instead of making an ego-driven post basically claiming your superiority among the small-stakes posters, you could read the posts, discover the mistakes, and then post a solution to their poor-play. in your case you would just flame the person for being a bad poker player and lambast him for even trying the game. I would rather be a bad poker player than an egotist

[srm80]

and that would be one thing that I myself have noticed among these forums...there are plenty of players willing to read a posted hand, then take the time to completely flame the person in a display of biting wit and complete knowledge of the game, all while showing people how amazing they are by making the person that posted the hand (only seeking help and advice from peers) look completely and utterly stupid. how about getting rid of the egos, coming down off of all those high pedastals and actually helping people improve their game?

[theben]

not raising before the flop with TT saves you from a decision more than it causes you one