|
|
#1
08-31-2005, 11:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
2 + 2 v. TFHAP
At times I feel that the style of some of the best 2 + 2'ers generally conflicts w/ a few sections of TFHAP.
One example off the cuff is the section in TFHAP that discusses playing high pp's when overs flop. Sklansky presents check and fold as a viable option, but possibly betting and then releasing too any strength. Good 2 + 2 posters would generally advocate a more aggressive line here, even in full games. To me, that appears to be the basic difference. the best posters on this site seem to advocate a more aggressive overall style, especially w/ blind defense/stealing, etc., which THFAP doesnt discuss extensively. Anyway, just curious if anyone else feels the same. Sometimes Im not quite sure whether to follow Sklansky's book or his site. Anyone else have any specific examples thoughts about the differences (or similarities) between 2 + 2 and TFHAP? 
|
|
#3
09-01-2005, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 + 2 v. TFHAP
TFHAP is Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players?
|
|
#4
09-01-2005, 02:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 + 2 v. TFHAP
The game was at a different place when dan slansky wrote TFHAP [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
Some of the mid high posters are in a different game and at a higher level than THFAP. I would imagine David would tend to agree with whatever the better posters on the boards determine the best play to be.
|
|
#5
09-01-2005, 02:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 + 2 v. TFHAP
[ QUOTE ]
most of the online games that 2ers play in are far more aggro than the bm games that were the norm when that book game out. [/ QUOTE ] This is definately true. Another contributing reason to the discrepancies is all the wrong agressive advice on these boards.
|
|
#9
09-01-2005, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 + 2 v. TFHAP
[ QUOTE ]
At times I feel that the style of some of the best 2 + 2'ers generally conflicts w/ a few sections of TFHAP. One example off the cuff is the section in TFHAP that discusses playing high pp's when overs flop. Sklansky presents check and fold as a viable option, but possibly betting and then releasing too any strength. Good 2 + 2 posters would generally advocate a more aggressive line here, even in full games. To me, that appears to be the basic difference. the best posters on this site seem to advocate a more aggressive overall style, especially w/ blind defense/stealing, etc., which THFAP doesnt discuss extensively. Anyway, just curious if anyone else feels the same. Sometimes Im not quite sure whether to follow Sklansky's book or his site. Anyone else have any specific examples thoughts about the differences (or similarities) between 2 + 2 and TFHAP? [/ QUOTE ] This still strategy still applys to online in alot of situations. For instance if you raise with QQ and the flop comes out K 8 9. And a person(whom you have no read on) bets into you and you have 4 people behind you yet to act, than you can fold here everytime. But if youre folding this hand in shorthanded steal situations youre giving up a lot.
|
|
#10
09-01-2005, 03:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2 + 2 v. TFHAP
like you said, the exact conditions are not very precise in the hand examples in the book. When they give an example of applying a concept the book usually outlines it something like "suppose you have XX on a XXX flop and your opponent bets, you should raise". Thats not very precise.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
