the psychology of the current 2+2er

[whiskeytown]

I mean besides the depravity, drugs, decadance, and depression...

This is a post that was in the review of Barry Greenstein's book - it's been on my mind for awhile, and so I wanna crosspost it here -

when discussing a review of Barry's book, David Sklansky said the following...

[ QUOTE ]
The vast majority of the readers of Barry's book will be well below the level of expertise that is required for the strategic advice meant mainly for 200-400 players. But the book will whet their appetites and make them want to buy other books that will help them climb the ladder to the point where they are most helped by Barry's writing. So while Mason is always scrupulously honest about his opinions in his reviews, you need not worry about how his review will hurt his financial interests

[/ QUOTE ]

To which I replied as follows...
[ QUOTE ]
alas, the common mentality of the 2+2 player today isn't about bettering himself to the 200/400 game.

it's about 8 tabling 3/6 Party Poker games and using automated tools to gather statistics on other players - (preferably using someone else's predefined standards) - all while maintaining enough accounts that bonuses can be easily accrued/withdrawn/accrued again.

the concept of attempting to better one's self at the game has pretty much gone in the toilet on many of the boards...I keep hoping for a commentary from you or Mason on it. Such actities are clearly +EV in the short term, but I don't see how they could be long term for one's game.

but I have ordered Barry's book - I hate Party Poker anyways... - I never play their 3/6 games.

RB


[/ QUOTE ]

discuss

[jay1313]

I think Al Schoonmaker said it best in his book and his many posts, there are many different reasons for playing poker. Without listing them all, one of the big ones is to make money, pure and simple. Another is to feel the challenge of the game to test your mental limits.

I don't think the challenge of the game and the make money are mutually exclusive but I do believe they are different motivations.

I have to admit, I am in the make money camp and I avail myself of the technology available to assist myself in online games. But I have also found that this technology has helped me in the live games. It has made me more attuned to what is happening at a live table and I play better there as a result.

The 2+2 players may very well be number crunching, but they are doing it by playing solid hands aggressively and I have become a better player reading the forums, the books and watching these players.

I doubt very highly that I will ever be eye to eye with Barry Greenstein at the $200/$400 game but I will feel very comfortable at a Vegas $10/$20 game (which the trip will be financed by my winnings at online $3/$6). 2+2 players, books and moderators are helping me get there.

[Roland19]

I agree that most people on these boards are looking to improve their low limit play, with or without the use of such programs as Gametime+ or PokerTracker, as well as maximize bonus potential, but a lot of people here are also looking to improve their general understanding of poker theory and its underlying concepts. You can't knock low limit players who are trying to do the best they can at their given level, just because they aren't immediately concerned with playing well enough to beat 400/800. There are a lot of places here where people are looking to improve their play and learning to beat bigger limits. Just look at the Mid-High Stakes forum, or some of the more experienced posters in the Small Stakes hold em forum. While many do use some kind of software to enhance their ability to get quick reads on players, I think there is a lot of good thinking/discussing going on there.

As a low limit player myself, I'm always looking for ways to improve my fundamental play, my hand reading skills, etc. Every once and awhile I check out the threads in the Mid-High Stakes Hold Em Forum, and that always keeps me thinking about how I can eventually take my game to the next level. So I agree with your general sentiment, but I don't think the forums are anywhere near going down the toilet.

Out of curiosity, what limits do you play and where?

[mosquito]

What shocked me was that people were going off on the
book like they did. Given that the book has some good
reviews, I might try to understand what I am missing
before just trshing the book in a public forum.

The review that started that thread you refer to, said
about the person reviewing, that they were sophomoric
and did not really know what was in the book.

[thirddan]

you are right...the current "average 2+2er" does not really want to better themselves to the point of being a successful ultra high or even high limit professional...


but in my situatino and i would imagine its common for many that post here, is that they are college students that want to make enough money doing something relatively fun/interesting so that they don't have to have a shitty job working at borders or starbucks or whatever...also, for most people in that situation, they will make double or triple or more what they could make in any standard job...

[bernie]

I mentioned it in a post awhile back. The technical level of the forum, on average, has gone up. However, the bar has been set lower for aspirations. I don't see the avg. 2+2er striving for a well rounded game. They're looking more for a cookie cutter/mass production answer. Which, when the games do eventually get tougher, will be a problem.

I think pre-WPT, many were working much harder on their games than what I see now.

b

[whiskeytown]

nothing illustrates your point better then "The System"

200+ pages of poker strategy, and what gets the most ink? - The two page cookie cutter solution. - What's the easy to program way to win a poker tournament -

come to think of it, I ranted on that pretty hard too.

RB

[Roland19]

[ QUOTE ]
nothing illustrates your point better then "The System"

200+ pages of poker strategy, and what gets the most ink? - The two page cookie cutter solution. - What's the easy to program way to win a poker tournament -

RB

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding of the system was that one was only supposed to use it if you can't play NL Hold Em nearly as well as any of your opponents, as in the example of the girl who had no playing expererience that he gives in the book. I don't think that the vast majority of people who read the book ever actually thought about implenting the System in a real tournament, except maybe for fun. It is better EV wise, and probably feels better, to play solid poker using the first 200 or so pages of poker theory that David illustrates, and go on to exploit your opponents mistakes the good old fashioned way.

The system, to me, seemed like an afterthought or a novelty, not really to be taken seriously. A kind of, "Hey, look what I thought of!" It might be best in situations where your opponents play ridiculously better than you, but even then, most will lose their chips the old fashioned way.

[SomethingClever]

You seem to feel that it's "better" to aspire to become a 200/400 pro and that everyone should feel the same way.

A lot of players are content to play 3/6 and win decent money without investing too much time and effort.

Personally, I don't know that I'll ever play higher than 15/30. The extra effort (and stress) required to beat higher and higher games isn't worth it for me. I play 5/10 6-max right now.

[FredJones888]

using software to make reads will not teach you how to make reads. the same goes for pot odds calculators and any other kind of crutch.