Views on Article.

[imported_excel]

[ QUOTE ]
Reading around through their forum I think I have finally found the place where all of the worst poker players in existence come to trade secrets. It is the FTR forum.

Reading through it I came across one laughable post after another. It would seem that merely being able to win in a $.5/$1 NL game on Party Poker would qualify one for expert status on that site. Every single post on FTR elicited a chuckle until I finally came across something that had me laughing so hard that I honestly feared waking my girlfriend. That was a 6 max limit hold'em guide written by one of their resident experts.



[/ QUOTE ]


Quote taken from:Poker Chronicles

His Party ID is :IBustChumps so anyone any PT data on this guy at 6 max?


However the link to the article is:

6 Max Guide


Have a read through and highlight wrong plays etc.

Thanks

[stigmata]

I've seen this before. There is an easier to read version here:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/6-Max-Limit-Guide.html

I had a quick scan of it. It all looks like pretty standard advice to me, you certainly wouldnt be going too far wrong if you followed it. It should get most newbies up and running.

As I say, I havent really read it, but it looks pretty basic/standard. It probably contains errors, but what do you expect from something you found through an internet search?

Saying that it is "laughable" is pretty conceited in my opinion.

[fyodor]

473 hands of 10/20 6 max
vpip 40.38
pfr 28.12
losing 8.58/100

[tablecop]

Ibustchumps aka vicki2 and ihateidiots online, posts here as themaroon

352 hands at 5/T (6max) 34/23/2.8 basically open raises with any pair any ace any two broadway from any position. and he has the postflop skills to make it pay.

[Alobar]

heh, is this another attempt at gettng a VPIP thing going, cuz thats the discussion that link turns into

[naphand]

The poker chronicles guy carries too many self-important notions about himself to be trustworthy in his opinions. Anyone who spends their time putting down others, without also taking the time to correct in detail is more interested in status than content. The fact that he laughs at others' attempts to produce helpful advice is also despicable.

As all forum users know, new players really just want some helpful tips and basic strategy to get themselves started and de facto this will mean any such advice is incorrect at some level or another, incomplete or glosses over topics that need more explanation to be optimal.

But what is really sad, and I know I am saying this as a 2+2 user, is his utterly unjustifiable and unsubstantiated remarks about 2+2, particularly as pointed out elsewhere, his book list contain 2 titles by Mason Malmuth. What a hypocrite. I note that there is a responder to this article who makes the ultimately idiotic statment

[ QUOTE ]
everybody there seems to be some sorta fooken expert, what a bunch of monkeys.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nicely balanced and justified with examples and irrefutable logic, of course. So 2+2 appears to be full of "experts", well perhaps by this reponders standards, and this makes them "monkeys". Gentlemen, Ladies, undefinable groups, this is precisely the "logic" of the morons you currently/will learn to beat in the online games. Argument and investigation is too much for these guys, their game is all about "gut feeling" and "balls". Feel free to rip their guts out and castrate them on the tables.

Sklansky may have his critics, but regardless of his tactical ability and player-reading skills, he has done more than any other poker writer to lucidly explain the math and theory behind playing poker. This alone has resulted in a massive increase in the understanding of the game and formed the basis for validating and developing strategy and enhancing reads etc. Being a great poker player is one thing, being able to explain is entirely different and also does not require greatness to teach well. The Poker Chronicles guy appears unable to distinguish these facts, I am (un)sure he will address this in his book... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

The depth of his ability is neatly expressed towards the end of his monologue:

[ QUOTE ]
I don't even think you could win at $5/$10 6 max, which may be the easiest game in the world for any decent stakes, playing only 20% of your hands voluntarily. Anyone who plays below 25% is at best marginal. Nobody very good would probably even be below 30%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only has he misunderstood the point (which talked about playing outside the blinds not V$IP) but chooses nice convenient 5% gaps for his "argument". And to state that playing less than 25% is "marginal" demontrates what an idiot he is. Nothing to back up his statements, no proof of WR, nothing, just hot air. He also does not define what "decent stakes" means, it could be that $5/$10 is the bottom end of "decent" for him, and it does not take a genius to anticipate the lowest level of "decent" would also be the easiest to play <sigh>. This article is notable for its total lack of substantive statistics or valid argument, it is just name-calling. Throwing numbers around and making claims without substance is worthless, his ideas need to be subject to scrutiny and rigorous examination of experienced players before making remarks like this. Unfortunately so many will read this and take it as gospel, after all, he's a poker pro right?

It all reminds me of another article David Sklansky Ate My Brain although, to be fair, this author does talk about the relevance of some theory to non-professional games and there is an element of humour.

Excel, and others, if you spend all your time trawling around the various forums and websites, you will end up very confused. By all means look around, but only accept solid argument and not woolly thinking. I started on RGP but found the number of useful posts/raging idiots ratio to be way too low. I have looked at other sites and some do have useful things, but there is no forum I know of where the standard of thinking that goes into threads is as high as here. 2+2 is unversally respected except, of course, by those with a vested interest in taking you away from it.

EDIT: He posts here as Maroon? Why? if it is so full of pseudo-experts and

[ QUOTE ]
the forum with the highest stupidity per capita, unless you count RGP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, by definition the biggest forum will have the most idiots, the most beginners, the most mistakes etc. Quite how he came up with the per capita notion is beyond me. Everything I have seen from him to date suggests he cannot back up his remarks with any kind of meaningful math. Why would he want to post?

[ QUOTE ]
the forum users...seem to be mainly marginal players who either think they are experts or think that there is a very small difference between themselves and experts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statements like this do nothing more than demonstrate the weakness of mind behind them. Many people are intimidated by intellectual rigour, and understandably so, some choose to behave like schoolchildren and call names, usually because they have no argument themselves (but they still "know"). Typical of this childishness is the tactic of ascribing thoughts to others, without proof of course, as a way to make them look pompous. Arrogance is a part of poker, it is towards the end of over-confidence, so people will think a lot of themselves but, telling others what forum posters are thinking without having to answer to such criticisms really is childish and cowardly.

[naphand]

[ QUOTE ]
and he has the postflop skills to make it pay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to validate this remark? How do you judge/measure this? Fyodors post seems to say the reverse.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

everybody there seems to be some sorta fooken expert, what a bunch of monkeys.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




[/ QUOTE ]

It is great the terrible players exist.

It is also great that players deliberately turn away from good advice.

[Alobar]

damn nap, you always put up incrdibly well thought out and dead on replys, but you always put them to posts so undeserving of such insightful analysis. Its gotta be -EV time wise [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[BradL]

Did you catch the part where this guy "themaroon" is currently writing his book. he expects it to take him a solid two weeks... im sure it will be filled with some stellar content...

-Brad