Do not understand Brunson in Super System

bilyin · #1 05-26-2005, 06:20 PM

I am a limit player trying to learn no limit.
Brunson in Super System said he was very aggressive and stole a lot of small pots. As a result when the big pots came along, he usually had the worse hands than his opponents. He said that was no problem because all the small pots he stole paid for those situations. Am I misunderstanding him? It appears to be absurd.

iceman5 · #2 05-26-2005, 06:32 PM

You are misunderstanding him badly.

Also, most of what he describes in his book will not work in todays online capped buy in games.

Mathemagician · #3 05-26-2005, 06:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You are misunderstanding him badly.

[/ QUOTE ]How? That is almost word-for-word what he says. He even says it's a freeroll for him because if he won 10 $3,000 pots he can afford to take the worst of it in a $30,000 pot. Hard to misunderstand that.

M

xorbie · #4 05-26-2005, 06:45 PM

Let's say you go buy 5 small pots for every big pot you are in. Then let's say the big pot is 10 times as big as the small pot.

So you win 5X outright. Then you are playing for 10X, so you really only need to win that pot rarely to break even (25% of the time).

So let's say every time you flop a flush draw or a straight you just push all in. Then let's say you get called about 1/6 times you do this. You then only need to hit 25% of the time to win, and you will probably hit more than that.

iceman5 · #5 05-26-2005, 07:06 PM

When he took the worst of it, it was usually by pushing all in with a flush or straight draw. I would be willing to bet that because the stacks were so big that the opponents folded to his all in enough times to make the "all in with a flush draw" +EV in itself.

Obviously if they call, hes taking the worst of it, but he still wins 1 out of 3.

They dont need to fold that often to make it +EV. Add that to the fact that he would bet pot with nothing and people were afraid to raise him because he might push in...so they would fold alot of good hands to him out of fear.

None of this will work in todays online capped buy in games.
Try pushing all in with flush draws and watch how fast you get called.

But I guess technically youre right if you meant that when he got called he was behind alot of the time

BluffTHIS! · #6 05-26-2005, 08:41 PM

Iceman's comments are right on point. Brunson raised with draws where he might be a dog but still had outs to hit. He did not call his stack off to allin bets with them.

Big_Jim · #7 05-26-2005, 09:33 PM

Another important aspect of Brunson's philosophy here is that he is playing against weak-tightish players, and that stacks are MUCH deeper than the 100X caps that we play with online. Thus, people are more afraid to risk 500 BBs with TPTK that they might look you up with for only 100X, increasing your fold equity.

soah · #8 05-26-2005, 10:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Iceman's comments are right on point. Brunson raised with draws where he might be a dog but still had outs to hit. He did not call his stack off to allin bets with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has been a while since I've read it so correct me if I'm wrong -- but I thought that at one point Doyle said that if he raised with a draw and got set all-in, he would call even if he was taking slightly the worst of it, because he wanted them to know that anytime they played back at him, they may have to play for their whole stack. He wanted to discourage people from playing back at him without huge hands.

But, I may have remembered the passage wrong.

iceman5 · #9 05-26-2005, 10:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Iceman's comments are right on point. Brunson raised with draws where he might be a dog but still had outs to hit. He did not call his stack off to allin bets with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has been a while since I've read it so correct me if I'm wrong -- but I thought that at one point Doyle said that if he raised with a draw and got set all-in, he would call even if he was taking slightly the worst of it, because he wanted them to know that anytime they played back at him, they may have to play for their whole stack. He wanted to discourage people from playing back at him without huge hands.

But, I may have remembered the passage wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Im pretty sure he did say that, but calling as a slight dog is still +EV once quite a bit of your money is in the pot...but also it does what you said..it makes the opponent realize that they cant push him out easily.

BluffTHIS! · #10 05-26-2005, 11:30 PM

That is correct. If he were reraised after having raised he would call allin at that point since he doesn't want players making moves on him without the nuts.