|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A short post on something I\'m doing these days
I sit down, I open a table, play for about 10-20 minutes and really focus on that table, get a good solid impression of that table. (6 max, so I'm seeing a good number of hands)
Then: I open my second table, do the same, shift more primary focus to that table and get the solid reads there. Just that 10 minute wait, rather than opening both tables at once, has made a big difference in the quality of reads that I've had, and I think it's been very beneficial as I play. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
profound
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
I never thought to do this... thanks for the tip.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
AHHH!
Probably need a bit more time on a full table though. Good tip |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
This is what I do...
1) datamine 2) play poker |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
Datamine gives you stats, stats don't give you the same information that watching people play gets you.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
[ QUOTE ]
Datamine gives you stats, stats don't give you the same information that watching people play gets you. [/ QUOTE ] in my opinion it gives you much more precise, thorough, useful information, and is slightly more scaleable. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
This seems awfully weird coming from somebody who makes his money in games that tend to run short, where how a guy plays seems even harder to define in specific numbers.
I use stats, but I think understanding how a guy will play types of hands and other observations that you get from observation alone give you more benefit. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
No hard feelings really, but I disagree pretty much 100%. I'd be very very very skeptical that you could "define how a guy plays" with 1k hands worth of observation better than by using 1k hands worth of data.
I'd also think it might be a bit more time effective to accumulate the data without having to observe. Though most of the sites I play I can only get information on hands I'm dealt in. My point is that probabilistic thinking for me rules. you can't do sh!t for bayesian analysis with observation unless you are rainman squared. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A short post on something I\'m doing these days
[ QUOTE ]
This seems awfully weird coming from somebody who makes his money in games that tend to run short, where how a guy plays seems even harder to define in specific numbers. [/ QUOTE ] It depends on what type of player (even human being) you are. Analytical / mathematical / statisical types will favor the data and the incredible amount of information contained therein. The opposite type of person will favor more specific reads acquired from a few observations. Analytical types will tell you they get a better picture out of 1k hands than those that aren't do. This is because of the encapsulatory nature of their statistics. |
|
|