Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-23-2005, 03:32 PM
citanul citanul is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 64
Default Re: categorizing your opponents??

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Come on.

OK, forget 8-tabling.

Early on, you're folding most of the time, making standard raises or limps most of the rest of the time, and making standard plays post-flop most of the time.

Later, it's push-or-fold, based mostly on position, cards, blinds, and stacks.

Yeah, occasionally reads help with marginal decisions. Also, if you get a donk who folds too much heads-up, I guess that counts as a "read".

But otherwise, it's just not all that important.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, that's true, i guess. if you hate money. but most of the rest of us, i think, play this game for money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, the old "ad hominem" attack, ignoring my arguments.

Nice example to set.

I'm done with this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

jebus, i pretty clearly attacked the root of your argument. let's go through it for the slow ones in back:

[ QUOTE ]
Early on, you're folding most of the time, making standard raises or limps most of the rest of the time, and making standard plays post-flop most of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

see my answer: you're throwing away piles of money by doing this at higher stakes games. i like money, so do other people. thus, the optimal advice is to not play in this manner

[ QUOTE ]
Later, it's push-or-fold, based mostly on position, cards, blinds, and stacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

see my answer: you forgot reads. one of the most important things (i guess you left it out in your haste to write about what things are "mostly" based on) is the reads of how loosely/tightly your opponents are raising and calling. again, since i like money, i like to pay attention to these things.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, occasionally reads help with marginal decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

or hey, we could change this to the much more correct (just for fun though, not for serious reasons): "Yes, reads help all the time with all decisions." yeah, that's just way, way closer to the truth of the matter. if you don't think reads are important to poker, you're just flat out wrong. i'm not saying that you can't make money playing pretty much any form of poker almost entirely without them, i'm asking that you see my previous post: you're giving up big buckets of free money by not paying attention to your opponents, and it's not like you're not playing the game to make money. it's the whole reason you're sitting there clicking away in the first place.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, if you get a donk who folds too much heads-up, I guess that counts as a "read".

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i guess that does. here, let's go from there: heads up, an opponent folding too much "might" count as a "read." how about - heads up, an opponents full set of tendencies you can observe count as a read? how about 3 handed, both opponents observable tendencies count as reads? 4 handed? 9 handed?

this really isn't very difficult, and you both haven't made any form of argument and argue poorly. but hey, that last sentence there isn't really necessary, i just wanted to get it off my chest.

c
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-23-2005, 03:34 PM
johnnybeef johnnybeef is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: its whats for dinner
Posts: 878
Default Re: categorizing your opponents??

[ QUOTE ]
Come on.

OK, forget 8-tabling.

Early on, you're folding most of the time, making standard raises or limps most of the rest of the time, and making standard plays post-flop most of the time.

Later, it's push-or-fold, based mostly on position, cards, blinds, and stacks.

Yeah, occasionally reads help with marginal decisions. Also, if you get a donk who folds too much heads-up, I guess that counts as a "read".

But otherwise, it's just not all that important.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never multitabled higher than the 55s before due to the fact that I continuously stub my toe in the bankroll/tilt management area of the game, but I can tell you that my success 8 tabling is 100% due to profiling. Regardless of what you think, everyone has a different push/call range. While I know that making generalizations about situations in a sng will enable you to beat them, being more specific about what a certain player will due in a certain situation will enable you to beat the games for a much better earn.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-23-2005, 03:53 PM
jb9 jb9 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 136
Default Re: categorizing your opponents??

It can be hard to get reads on people in one SNG, and by the time you have a read on someone, you or he is likely to be eliminated.

That said, I find reads can be very helpful when you get down to 5 or fewer players (and you usually have enough hands to have some kind of a read on 1 or 2 of them).

A few things I try to pick up on are:
<ul type="square">[*]someone who can raise preflop and fold or check/fold the flop (probably plays his cards)
[*]someone who overdefends his blinds but folds easily on the flop (steal on the flop, not preflop)
[*]someone who checkraises (some people just don't...)
[*]someone who is tight but never raises preflop (if he bets the flop, he's got something...)
[*]someone who plays any ace
[*]someone who bets any pair on the flop
[*]someone who is tight early and gets aggressive when down to 8-12 BB (then I think it's one of you)
[*]maniacs (isolate)
[*]calling stations (don't bluff)
[*]someone trying to fold into the money (steal all his blinds)
[*]someone who has folded to a scare card in a big pot
[*]someone whose chat indicates he is a 'by the book' player (usually won't adjust when game is shorthanded) [/list]Of course with so few hands, these reads are sometimes wrong, but they are right enough to make them worthwhile, and if you see the same player again you can refine your read.

FWIW, I'm just a recreational player and usually play 1 or 2 tables at a time in the $10-$30 buyin range.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-23-2005, 04:04 PM
Manque Manque is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 61
Default Re: categorizing your opponents??



[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, the old "ad hominem" attack


[/ QUOTE ]

To paraphase Inigo Montoya from the Princess Bride. I don't think this means what you think it means.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-23-2005, 05:52 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: categorizing your opponents??

I only single table 11's, but by the time I reach the bubble I have a pretty good read on each one of the remaining opponents.

I don't think you're engaged enough in the hands you aren't in. I pay attention to every bet at the table regardless of whether I'm in a hand or not. I also take pretty thorough notes.

Maybe this is excessive, but I'm not blessed with great natural talent for the game. It seems to have served me well this far.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 09:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.