m*****i
发帖数: 1873 | 1 Full Tilt Poker Game #10425033775: Table Padbury (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit
Hold'em - 2:57:01 ET - 2009/02/04
Seat 1: GodsPetMonkey ($206)
Seat 2: theguy28 ($143)
Seat 3: tnewman41 ($245.60)
Seat 4: pispopo ($200)
Seat 5: rjimmy90 ($266.15)
Seat 6: yanjiegou2007 ($198)
yanjiegou2007 posts the small blind of $1
GodsPetMonkey posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to yanjiegou2007 [Qc Qs]
theguy28 raises to $7
tnewman41 folds
pispopo folds
rjimmy90 folds
yanjie | d**x
发帖数: 1934 | 2 same here..
AA got busted by quad 3....
lost one buy-in..
Limit
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: Full Tilt Poker Game #10425033775: Table Padbury (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit
: Hold'em - 2:57:01 ET - 2009/02/04
: Seat 1: GodsPetMonkey ($206)
: Seat 2: theguy28 ($143)
: Seat 3: tnewman41 ($245.60)
: Seat 4: pispopo ($200)
: Seat 5: rjimmy90 ($266.15)
: Seat 6: yanjiegou2007 ($198)
: yanjiegou2007 posts the small blind of $1
: GodsPetMonkey posts the big blind of $2
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 3 well, this hand is foldable on the turn for his all-in, although tough.
the ONLY real hand that he would play the same way pre-flop and on flop, may
be TT, unless he's very loose.
the only other hand you can beat is a pure bluff.
AA is at high end for his pre-flop "weakness", but KK, AJ, 99,... all got
you beat. A9s? hardly for his turn all-in.
QQ is an over pair, but just over a little bit above average in this case.
it looks pretty but not strong at all.
Limit
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: Full Tilt Poker Game #10425033775: Table Padbury (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit
: Hold'em - 2:57:01 ET - 2009/02/04
: Seat 1: GodsPetMonkey ($206)
: Seat 2: theguy28 ($143)
: Seat 3: tnewman41 ($245.60)
: Seat 4: pispopo ($200)
: Seat 5: rjimmy90 ($266.15)
: Seat 6: yanjiegou2007 ($198)
: yanjiegou2007 posts the small blind of $1
: GodsPetMonkey posts the big blind of $2
| l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 4 There is no need to complain about losing QQ to AA. QQ is foldable in most
cases. And losing KK to AA is paying the dues.
Got my AA cracked by a pair of Duce last Sat at the regular homegame. My
QQ beat the other guy's AA at yesterday's weekday homegame. I ended up with
a straight. It is lucky to beat AA with QQ. Nothing to complain about
when losing to AA. | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 5 well, you don't have to reraise, you don't have to lead the bet and you
don't have to call the all-in on turn....
Limit
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: Full Tilt Poker Game #10425033775: Table Padbury (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit
: Hold'em - 2:57:01 ET - 2009/02/04
: Seat 1: GodsPetMonkey ($206)
: Seat 2: theguy28 ($143)
: Seat 3: tnewman41 ($245.60)
: Seat 4: pispopo ($200)
: Seat 5: rjimmy90 ($266.15)
: Seat 6: yanjiegou2007 ($198)
: yanjiegou2007 posts the small blind of $1
: GodsPetMonkey posts the big blind of $2
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 6 the 6-max game is a little bit different though, ppl are all very aggressive
, big action.
one day watched melonli's table (1/2NL), cutoff raises $7, button raises to
$25, cutoff 4-bets $70, button shoves $200, cutoff calls..
cutoff: A7o
button: KQo
button wins with a K on the turn.
melonli said in chat: "wow!"
lol.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: well, you don't have to reraise, you don't have to lead the bet and you
: don't have to call the all-in on turn....
:
: Limit
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 7 I will call.
In many cases, if you show weakness, I just shove it in or bet very big such as 44$ there(usually I am very weak), it does not matter what hands I have.
Should say that buddy plays that hand very well, get most value from his
hands and his play. A little improvement is that he can bet 36$ on the turn instead of shove in, can induce a big bluff from aq or ak or shove in by 88. When he bets 36$, he can have all sorts of hands 34 or a 10, 88, kq. More deceived.
Limit
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: Full Tilt Poker Game #10425033775: Table Padbury (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit
: Hold'em - 2:57:01 ET - 2009/02/04
: Seat 1: GodsPetMonkey ($206)
: Seat 2: theguy28 ($143)
: Seat 3: tnewman41 ($245.60)
: Seat 4: pispopo ($200)
: Seat 5: rjimmy90 ($266.15)
: Seat 6: yanjiegou2007 ($198)
: yanjiegou2007 posts the small blind of $1
: GodsPetMonkey posts the big blind of $2
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 8 those are the fish you really want to play against. That's why if one
plays a solid abc poker, he can just win, sooner or later.
the first raise is ok. The first reraise is based on the reading that
button likes stealing, the third reraise is ok only when
cutoff reads that button would reraise with a lot of weak hands.
The 4th reraise is complete nonsense, the final call doesn't make much
sense either.
aggressive
to
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: the 6-max game is a little bit different though, ppl are all very aggressive
: , big action.
: one day watched melonli's table (1/2NL), cutoff raises $7, button raises to
: $25, cutoff 4-bets $70, button shoves $200, cutoff calls..
: cutoff: A7o
: button: KQo
: button wins with a K on the turn.
: melonli said in chat: "wow!"
: lol.
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 9 well, people can just slowplay you and make a lot of money.
Basically, those huge bluffs should be avoided in any low stake ring
games IMO, unless you read your opp is really weak tight, as tight as
melonli who folded Q high flush facing 4/5 pot bet on river...
such as 44$ there(usually I am very weak), it does not matter what hands I
have.
turn instead of shove in, can induce a big bluff from aq or ak or shove in
by 88. When he bets 36$, he can have all sorts of hands 34 or a 10, 88, kq.
More
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: I will call.
: In many cases, if you show weakness, I just shove it in or bet very big such as 44$ there(usually I am very weak), it does not matter what hands I have.
: Should say that buddy plays that hand very well, get most value from his
: hands and his play. A little improvement is that he can bet 36$ on the turn instead of shove in, can induce a big bluff from aq or ak or shove in by 88. When he bets 36$, he can have all sorts of hands 34 or a 10, 88, kq. More deceived.
:
: Limit
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 10 Maybe not fish.
ABC Poker can not garantee a big winner on 1/2 table.
I guess high buyin(1000dollar buyin 6-max) game, aj, qk all in preflop is
very often.
People will not allow to be pushed around.
On FTP(yanjiegou2007's) 1/2 table, that kind of action are quite normal.
Poker players are much stronger than 1 year ago, lots of regular there.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: those are the fish you really want to play against. That's why if one
: plays a solid abc poker, he can just win, sooner or later.
: the first raise is ok. The first reraise is based on the reading that
: button likes stealing, the third reraise is ok only when
: cutoff reads that button would reraise with a lot of weak hands.
: The 4th reraise is complete nonsense, the final call doesn't make much
: sense either.
:
: aggressive
: to
| | | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 11 Well, I don't see anything advanced here. They both commit all of their
chips
with a hand that is not good enough. If you often do things like this, there
is
no way you can survive. ring game is no where close to tournaments, cause
the stacks are usually very deep, so one has to try not to make huge 100 bb+
mistakes to be profitable.
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: Maybe not fish.
: ABC Poker can not garantee a big winner on 1/2 table.
: I guess high buyin(1000dollar buyin 6-max) game, aj, qk all in preflop is
: very often.
: People will not allow to be pushed around.
: On FTP(yanjiegou2007's) 1/2 table, that kind of action are quite normal.
: Poker players are much stronger than 1 year ago, lots of regular there.
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 12 compared to what i've seen in live, online is at least 2 levels up.
and 1/2NL online is like 2/5NL live, 6-max? maybe 5/10+.
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: Maybe not fish.
: ABC Poker can not garantee a big winner on 1/2 table.
: I guess high buyin(1000dollar buyin 6-max) game, aj, qk all in preflop is
: very often.
: People will not allow to be pushed around.
: On FTP(yanjiegou2007's) 1/2 table, that kind of action are quite normal.
: Poker players are much stronger than 1 year ago, lots of regular there.
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 13 on line can be more aggressive, but aggression doesn't mean
good, especially for cash games. Cash game is something about rare events,
and one has to be patient not to make huge mistakes to win in a long run.
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: compared to what i've seen in live, online is at least 2 levels up.
: and 1/2NL online is like 2/5NL live, 6-max? maybe 5/10+.
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 14 Poker is kind of poker game, not just card game.
You need have the guts to bet. I take down a lot of pots by just betting
recently, it improves my game a lot.
You bet there to represent big pair, surely kk, aa , qq will call u or allin
u there.
I am a believer of "first better , the winner". Typical rule.
.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: well, people can just slowplay you and make a lot of money.
: Basically, those huge bluffs should be avoided in any low stake ring
: games IMO, unless you read your opp is really weak tight, as tight as
: melonli who folded Q high flush facing 4/5 pot bet on river...
:
: such as 44$ there(usually I am very weak), it does not matter what hands I
: have.
: turn instead of shove in, can induce a big bluff from aq or ak or shove in
: by 88. When he bets 36$, he can have all sorts of hands 34 or a 10, 88, kq.
: More
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 15 Yeah. I agree. Too many regulars on online ring game or online tournaments
now. Those regulars play too much poker, very hard to tackle.
When I play 1/2NL on cakepoker, the same guys almost every time.
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: compared to what i've seen in live, online is at least 2 levels up.
: and 1/2NL online is like 2/5NL live, 6-max? maybe 5/10+.
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 16 aggressiver can take down pots in 2 ways, their cards or their aggression. Just like WSOP, jerry yang takes down big pots not by his hands instead by his betting, betting. It is the same in cash game.
And aggressiver can build their image and take small pots. And build big
pots later on when they have a hand. Just like Wsop 2008 champ, many people see he wins when he has a big hand, and people push their chips in with nothing. Why? Because that guy already build his aggressive image. Surely, tha
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: on line can be more aggressive, but aggression doesn't mean
: good, especially for cash games. Cash game is something about rare events,
: and one has to be patient not to make huge mistakes to win in a long run.
| m******1
发帖数: 715 | 17 6-max is nicely paced, like riding a horse.
the ring game is too slow, like a cow.
the live ring game is unbearably slow, like a camel.
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: compared to what i've seen in live, online is at least 2 levels up.
: and 1/2NL online is like 2/5NL live, 6-max? maybe 5/10+.
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 18 yeah, at certain level, almost all your opponents know how to play "standard
" poker, how to trap, bluff, pot odds... at least as well as you do. you
barely have any edge over them. then aggression plays a much bigger role,
same as tilt.
and i don't label a guy as TAG or LAG any more, because many of them are
now more like "selectively aggressive" or tricky.
Just like WSOP, jerry yang takes down big pots not by his hands instead by
his betting, betting. It is the same in cash game.
people see h
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: aggressiver can take down pots in 2 ways, their cards or their aggression. Just like WSOP, jerry yang takes down big pots not by his hands instead by his betting, betting. It is the same in cash game.
: And aggressiver can build their image and take small pots. And build big
: pots later on when they have a hand. Just like Wsop 2008 champ, many people see he wins when he has a big hand, and people push their chips in with nothing. Why? Because that guy already build his aggressive image. Surely, tha
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 19 i normally avoid them. i label them with "purple" color, lol, and 2 guys of
this type sit down on my left, i leave.
they play thousands of hands every day, unless they're rich and stupid (don'
t care about loss), in a few months (many have played for years), they know
at least what i know. playing with a bunch of these guys is negative EV for
me.
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: Yeah. I agree. Too many regulars on online ring game or online tournaments
: now. Those regulars play too much poker, very hard to tackle.
: When I play 1/2NL on cakepoker, the same guys almost every time.
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 20 Yeah, I usually do not want to play against them. It is hard to win them,
surely, they can not win me so easily. But on cakepoker, almost every table
has 1 or 2 such regulars. Those regulars just play every day.
One guy I know, he says he play 6k hands every day. Surely, if such guy
reraise me on a limped pot, I will lay down top pair top kicker.
If there is a fish on the table, I will call with marginal hands. Fish will
lose all his chips sooner or later, It is a pity to not get his chips.
of
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: i normally avoid them. i label them with "purple" color, lol, and 2 guys of
: this type sit down on my left, i leave.
: they play thousands of hands every day, unless they're rich and stupid (don'
: t care about loss), in a few months (many have played for years), they know
: at least what i know. playing with a bunch of these guys is negative EV for
: me.
| | | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 21 well, you may really want to read Sklansky's book on no limit holdem.
Basically,
over aggressiveness is the shortcut to huge mistakes in deep stack
poker. For example, you may want to raise based on a draw, however,
sometimes, you just lose all your pot equities when you raise, get reraised
and have to fold. For example, suppose you raise 77 at mid position to 4 bb,
a shortstack with 50 bb can reraise you to 12 bb with AA and there is no way
you can profitably call that raise in a long run. If y
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: aggressiver can take down pots in 2 ways, their cards or their aggression. Just like WSOP, jerry yang takes down big pots not by his hands instead by his betting, betting. It is the same in cash game.
: And aggressiver can build their image and take small pots. And build big
: pots later on when they have a hand. Just like Wsop 2008 champ, many people see he wins when he has a big hand, and people push their chips in with nothing. Why? Because that guy already build his aggressive image. Surely, tha
| y********n
发帖数: 2063 | 22 ABC poker is hard to win on 1/2 6max game now.
suppose you limp with 77, people will repop you with all sorts of cards with
position especially button, aq, kq, 88, 78suited, it is very hard to play,
and you can not represent too much if you limp.
if you play ABC poker, when you get trips, and you limp with 77, and call a
big reraise, I do not think regular will pay you too much. Even they hold
over pair or top pair top kicker.
77 is fancy hands, if you do not raise, and other ppl call you with p
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: well, you may really want to read Sklansky's book on no limit holdem.
: Basically,
: over aggressiveness is the shortcut to huge mistakes in deep stack
: poker. For example, you may want to raise based on a draw, however,
: sometimes, you just lose all your pot equities when you raise, get reraised
: and have to fold. For example, suppose you raise 77 at mid position to 4 bb,
: a shortstack with 50 bb can reraise you to 12 bb with AA and there is no way
: you can profitably call that raise in a long run. If y
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 23 as I said, you still didn't get the point of my post. The key in no limit
poker isn't pot, it's big bets. It's fine to lose 10 small pots and win
a big one to stack your opp, especially when the stack is as deep as 150
or more. Of course, nobody would mind taking down small pots, but the real
beef in this game is all about big pots. Like the A7 vs KQ all in, more
than 100 bb are in the pot preflop, which is the typical trade mark of
over aggressive players. Also, if one raises too much on the bu
【在 y********n 的大作中提到】
: ABC poker is hard to win on 1/2 6max game now.
: suppose you limp with 77, people will repop you with all sorts of cards with
: position especially button, aq, kq, 88, 78suited, it is very hard to play,
: and you can not represent too much if you limp.
: if you play ABC poker, when you get trips, and you limp with 77, and call a
: big reraise, I do not think regular will pay you too much. Even they hold
: over pair or top pair top kicker.
: 77 is fancy hands, if you do not raise, and other ppl call you with p
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 24 generally, yes.
specifically to 6-max online games, not actually.
ppl nowadays play very creatively and tricky online (due to the huge volume
of hands, 100K hands a month easily), change gears all the time, which is
why i said it's hard to label a guy as LAG or TAG any more.
6-max is a fast paced, short handed and aggressive game. "aggressive" here
does not simply mean they raise too often with trash. ppl all know what you
and i are thinking, and vice versa.
like the A7 vs. KQ hand, both guys on
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: as I said, you still didn't get the point of my post. The key in no limit
: poker isn't pot, it's big bets. It's fine to lose 10 small pots and win
: a big one to stack your opp, especially when the stack is as deep as 150
: or more. Of course, nobody would mind taking down small pots, but the real
: beef in this game is all about big pots. Like the A7 vs KQ all in, more
: than 100 bb are in the pot preflop, which is the typical trade mark of
: over aggressive players. Also, if one raises too much on the bu
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 25 6-max no limit holdem is still no limit holdem. No matter how aggressive
(conservative) one
is, there is something in common in no limit holdem for deep stacks, big
hands
for big pots. Any violation of this principle has resulted and will result
big losses and small gains. That's why I said you guys still don't get the
core
spirit of this game. Those preflop raises don't really mean much in this
game,
it's the postflop big bets and preflop allin confrontations that matters
most.
No matter how y
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: generally, yes.
: specifically to 6-max online games, not actually.
: ppl nowadays play very creatively and tricky online (due to the huge volume
: of hands, 100K hands a month easily), change gears all the time, which is
: why i said it's hard to label a guy as LAG or TAG any more.
: 6-max is a fast paced, short handed and aggressive game. "aggressive" here
: does not simply mean they raise too often with trash. ppl all know what you
: and i are thinking, and vice versa.
: like the A7 vs. KQ hand, both guys on
| l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 26 Even just a couple days ago I was also thinking about poker in general terms
. I finally realised why 2+2 forum set up different sections for different
levels and full ring and 6-max games. Texas Hold'em is a totally different
game among players at different skill levels. I even tried out the nl5
6max games. very aggressive and lots of action there.
And it is very important to win the small pots to mantain a steady winrate.
Being aggressive helps a lot in that aspect. I just installed po
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: as I said, you still didn't get the point of my post. The key in no limit
: poker isn't pot, it's big bets. It's fine to lose 10 small pots and win
: a big one to stack your opp, especially when the stack is as deep as 150
: or more. Of course, nobody would mind taking down small pots, but the real
: beef in this game is all about big pots. Like the A7 vs KQ all in, more
: than 100 bb are in the pot preflop, which is the typical trade mark of
: over aggressive players. Also, if one raises too much on the bu
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 27 nah, they (if not all) have gone up at least one level beyond that big hands
big pots pinciple.
they play A7 like this in a hand (again, JUST this hand, not even 3/10 hands
), they might play AA the same or totally differently in another. that's why
i said they're "selectively aggressive", or in another word, more
unpredicatable/tricky to traditional solid poker playing.
you may think that you can be patient and wait to attack them more
effectively and big. right, but they're not stupid either.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: 6-max no limit holdem is still no limit holdem. No matter how aggressive
: (conservative) one
: is, there is something in common in no limit holdem for deep stacks, big
: hands
: for big pots. Any violation of this principle has resulted and will result
: big losses and small gains. That's why I said you guys still don't get the
: core
: spirit of this game. Those preflop raises don't really mean much in this
: game,
: it's the postflop big bets and preflop allin confrontations that matters
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 28 yeah, you have to be able to adjust to your opponents' style. aggression is
one of your weapons, you may be not as aggressive but not weak either.
6-max is like half way between normal 9/10 table and heads-up (where
aggression is most important).
terms
different
different
.
a
.6
amazing
from
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: Even just a couple days ago I was also thinking about poker in general terms
: . I finally realised why 2+2 forum set up different sections for different
: levels and full ring and 6-max games. Texas Hold'em is a totally different
: game among players at different skill levels. I even tried out the nl5
: 6max games. very aggressive and lots of action there.
: And it is very important to win the small pots to mantain a steady winrate.
: Being aggressive helps a lot in that aspect. I just installed po
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 29 well, it's just nonsense. as long as you push more than 100 bb
allin with KQo or call it with
A7s, you are the sucker. There is nothing about selective aggresiveness or
not.
Also, the deeper the stack is, the bigger the mistake is.
That's why I said, the first three raises may make sense, but the last two
are just big blows.
hands
hands
why
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: nah, they (if not all) have gone up at least one level beyond that big hands
: big pots pinciple.
: they play A7 like this in a hand (again, JUST this hand, not even 3/10 hands
: ), they might play AA the same or totally differently in another. that's why
: i said they're "selectively aggressive", or in another word, more
: unpredicatable/tricky to traditional solid poker playing.
: you may think that you can be patient and wait to attack them more
: effectively and big. right, but they're not stupid either.
| p*******p
发帖数: 13670 | 30 if you just raise when you first in, and CB 100% of time, people will pick
you up very fast, at least at 100nl or up, they will float around with air,
either raise you flop, or flat flop and bet/raise turn, what you do now?
fire second bullet? what if they still not folding? how many times you are
willing to fire 3 barrels with just A high?
terms
different
different
.
a
.6
amazing
from
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: Even just a couple days ago I was also thinking about poker in general terms
: . I finally realised why 2+2 forum set up different sections for different
: levels and full ring and 6-max games. Texas Hold'em is a totally different
: game among players at different skill levels. I even tried out the nl5
: 6max games. very aggressive and lots of action there.
: And it is very important to win the small pots to mantain a steady winrate.
: Being aggressive helps a lot in that aspect. I just installed po
| | | m******1
发帖数: 715 | 31 I have great respect to Sklansky's theory. But games are not exactly the
same with online, 6-max, PL, CAP,etc. More importantly, the players are
having different perspectives, too. Most people play these micro and small
stack do not expect make a living on it.
Bottom line, theory aside, go plug-in and play you will see what work. 77 (
and other small pairs) in early position is a good example. You will find
out which is more profitable by playing 50% limpin and 50% raise-in, after
probably | l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 32 That is the whole point. people have to start talking about poker the way
people on 2+2 do. talking about the hands and strategies in the context of
the level they are playing in.
I'm playing at NL 10. I will throughly update and refine my skill set as I
move up to NL 25 let alone NL 100 which is a totally different game.
If you keep try to apply what people are talking about in one specific level
to other levels, you are just trying to pick up fights and the whole
conversation become no
【在 p*******p 的大作中提到】
: if you just raise when you first in, and CB 100% of time, people will pick
: you up very fast, at least at 100nl or up, they will float around with air,
: either raise you flop, or flat flop and bet/raise turn, what you do now?
: fire second bullet? what if they still not folding? how many times you are
: willing to fire 3 barrels with just A high?
:
: terms
: different
: different
: .
| l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 33 I'm timid compare to the girls in my group. The guys in my group go to AC
and come back with $1000+ winnings and routines gets rulelessly beaten up by
the girls. :)
At the homegame last Sat, one girl proundly turn over A high not to show
off a bluff but to show off an A high "monster hand" that she turely
believes in.
Then the every next hand, with the flop J 10 2 rainbow, one guy went all in
, second guy called. My best friend went all in right after those two with
10 5 off suite whic
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: yeah, you have to be able to adjust to your opponents' style. aggression is
: one of your weapons, you may be not as aggressive but not weak either.
: 6-max is like half way between normal 9/10 table and heads-up (where
: aggression is most important).
:
: terms
: different
: different
: .
: a
| p*******p
发帖数: 13670 | 34 yah, but what they are talking about is 200nl 6-max game....
of
I
level
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: That is the whole point. people have to start talking about poker the way
: people on 2+2 do. talking about the hands and strategies in the context of
: the level they are playing in.
: I'm playing at NL 10. I will throughly update and refine my skill set as I
: move up to NL 25 let alone NL 100 which is a totally different game.
: If you keep try to apply what people are talking about in one specific level
: to other levels, you are just trying to pick up fights and the whole
: conversation become no
| l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 35 I was making the point that stratege is level related. A good nl 100
player would have a very tough time at nl 2 where no player ever thinks much
.
have to simplfy to the basic basic basic ABC poker at those levels. People
will fold when they have nothing and play back at you when they have
something. they dont care what you have or dont have. more often than not,
they wont even notice the flush on the broad when you are trying to present
a flush. Turely no reason to bother.
We all have
【在 p*******p 的大作中提到】
: yah, but what they are talking about is 200nl 6-max game....
:
: of
: I
: level
| p*******p
发帖数: 13670 | 36 lol, I guaruntee you a good nl 100 player won't have a very tough time at nl
2
, maybe boring, but dude, no way to be tough
much
not,
present
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: I was making the point that stratege is level related. A good nl 100
: player would have a very tough time at nl 2 where no player ever thinks much
: .
: have to simplfy to the basic basic basic ABC poker at those levels. People
: will fold when they have nothing and play back at you when they have
: something. they dont care what you have or dont have. more often than not,
: they wont even notice the flush on the broad when you are trying to present
: a flush. Turely no reason to bother.
: We all have
| l**********t
发帖数: 269 | 37 check out Daniel Negreanu's blog on his trail of turnning $10 into $10,000
by playing on stars from NL2 then. I hope you consider him a better than
average player. and another regular poster DiggerDog's tour of the micro.
This is my last post on this topic.
nl
【在 p*******p 的大作中提到】
: lol, I guaruntee you a good nl 100 player won't have a very tough time at nl
: 2
: , maybe boring, but dude, no way to be tough
:
: much
: not,
: present
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 38 no way. a winning player can beat all low limit games with the right
bankroll.
If he can't beat it, he has a hole in his game. Also, I don't even think
nl100 and nl200 are tough games at all. Players at this level
make tons of mistakes, some are really silly, like the A7 KQ all in one.
much
not,
present
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: I was making the point that stratege is level related. A good nl 100
: player would have a very tough time at nl 2 where no player ever thinks much
: .
: have to simplfy to the basic basic basic ABC poker at those levels. People
: will fold when they have nothing and play back at you when they have
: something. they dont care what you have or dont have. more often than not,
: they wont even notice the flush on the broad when you are trying to present
: a flush. Turely no reason to bother.
: We all have
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 39 hehe, if you never play a hand like this in 6-max, you'll be the sucker for
sure. if you play more hands like this, you'll be a sucker for sure too.
that's the reality in such games.
the point is, you have to adjust your aggression level in diff. games (9/10
regular, 6-max, 3 handed, heads up), againist diff. opponents, in diff.
modes (tilt, new to table, mix-up...). you play a sinlge style, you're
doomed to fail.
take this hand for example, both of them actually put the other one without
a stro
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: well, it's just nonsense. as long as you push more than 100 bb
: allin with KQo or call it with
: A7s, you are the sucker. There is nothing about selective aggresiveness or
: not.
: Also, the deeper the stack is, the bigger the mistake is.
: That's why I said, the first three raises may make sense, but the last two
: are just big blows.
:
: hands
: hands
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 40 hehe, sigh, is tom "durrr" dwan a winning player?
watch how he plays this hand and read the comments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfCZzFESDVI
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: no way. a winning player can beat all low limit games with the right
: bankroll.
: If he can't beat it, he has a hole in his game. Also, I don't even think
: nl100 and nl200 are tough games at all. Players at this level
: make tons of mistakes, some are really silly, like the A7 KQ all in one.
:
: much
: not,
: present
| | | w***w
发帖数: 6301 | 41 That was a bad play but he got lucky.
Chance to flop 2 pairs are 1/50.
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: hehe, sigh, is tom "durrr" dwan a winning player?
: watch how he plays this hand and read the comments:
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfCZzFESDVI
| w***w
发帖数: 6301 | 42 If we discuss method, we need to assume same level among all players.
If some method works because one player play better than another,then you
can't make conclusion that this method is better.
一个武功高手用木剑打败用铁剑的对手,你不能得出结论木剑比铁剑厉害.
for
10
without
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: hehe, if you never play a hand like this in 6-max, you'll be the sucker for
: sure. if you play more hands like this, you'll be a sucker for sure too.
: that's the reality in such games.
: the point is, you have to adjust your aggression level in diff. games (9/10
: regular, 6-max, 3 handed, heads up), againist diff. opponents, in diff.
: modes (tilt, new to table, mix-up...). you play a sinlge style, you're
: doomed to fail.
: take this hand for example, both of them actually put the other one without
: a stro
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 43 嗯，你说的这个剑和俺想的例子一模一样，比如杨过，从重剑到无剑，你不能只看到他
没拿剑，就得出结论我拿了利剑就能搞定他。殊不知别人已经早经过了这么一个轮回，
知道的东西，经历的战局比你多得多。
就像A7 vs KQ这把牌一样，你从外面咋一看，很容易靠“直觉”经验论得出两个白痴的
结论，其实也许不然，脱离当时情况(2个人正好在同一时刻都打的同一把算盘)，和上
下文(两个人整体风格如何，这样玩这种牌有多大几率)，和外部环境(什么样风格的比
赛，6-max, HU, 9/10，什么样筹码...)
tom dwan这把也是，只看这把牌，有人在comments里面写了，纯靠运气啊！可也有人马
上回了，tom dwan出道不过几年时间，从micro games玩起，一直以aggressive猛进，
积累到几百万身家，换个人运气一把，N把，N万把，来看看？
看牌不能脱离环境，你也许永远不会这么玩A7，你也许永远认为这么玩都是错的，可是
你不能否认有人能玩得很成功，区别只在于怎么玩，什么时候玩，doyle的favorite
hands还是T2o呢，虽然他写super system那么严谨。
aggres
【在 w***w 的大作中提到】
: If we discuss method, we need to assume same level among all players.
: If some method works because one player play better than another,then you
: can't make conclusion that this method is better.
: 一个武功高手用木剑打败用铁剑的对手,你不能得出结论木剑比铁剑厉害.
:
: for
: 10
: without
| w***w
发帖数: 6301 | 44 A,7当然可以玩,但拿A,7 allin就是另一回事.
而且我已经说了,打法是打法,player skill是player skill,不能混在一起.
如果你能拿A,7打败别人A,K,那是你水平比别人高,不是A,7比A,K好.
如果在讨论打法的时候,把player skill的因素混进去,那永远也得不出哪种打法好的结
论.
dwan的那手就是个bad play.
He need to flop 2 pairs or flush to beat opponent.That accounts a total
porbability of 4%. That means he need to make 25 times 8K, which is 200k if
he does flop 2 pairs or flush.Yet he only made 130K.So if he play longer by
this way, he would be a loser.
That's why you need to limp in with suited connectors.Because | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 45 that's your biggest nonsense. There exists a winning strategy in deep
stack poker against most players like you mentioned or yourself. That
strategy
is way more conservative on big bets, which means it doesn't have to win
as much as some do. That's not because that strategy sucks. that's only
because
the sucker play a way more pathetic game and one need to adjust in some
aspacts in his game to beat those suckers more heavily. However, those
adjustments are just poker mistakes. For example, you m
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: hehe, if you never play a hand like this in 6-max, you'll be the sucker for
: sure. if you play more hands like this, you'll be a sucker for sure too.
: that's the reality in such games.
: the point is, you have to adjust your aggression level in diff. games (9/10
: regular, 6-max, 3 handed, heads up), againist diff. opponents, in diff.
: modes (tilt, new to table, mix-up...). you play a sinlge style, you're
: doomed to fail.
: take this hand for example, both of them actually put the other one without
: a stro
| l*****r
发帖数: 2123 | 46 讨论玩了。 老大做个合集吧。
nice discussion.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: that's your biggest nonsense. There exists a winning strategy in deep
: stack poker against most players like you mentioned or yourself. That
: strategy
: is way more conservative on big bets, which means it doesn't have to win
: as much as some do. That's not because that strategy sucks. that's only
: because
: the sucker play a way more pathetic game and one need to adjust in some
: aspacts in his game to beat those suckers more heavily. However, those
: adjustments are just poker mistakes. For example, you m
| p*******p
发帖数: 13670 | 47 和谐和谐,今天真爽,碰到一个vpip=70的大鱼, 然后我看到他limp我也limp,哈哈, 不过
丫运气真好, 总能draw out,或者直接flop full house, quads什么的
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: that's your biggest nonsense. There exists a winning strategy in deep
: stack poker against most players like you mentioned or yourself. That
: strategy
: is way more conservative on big bets, which means it doesn't have to win
: as much as some do. That's not because that strategy sucks. that's only
: because
: the sucker play a way more pathetic game and one need to adjust in some
: aspacts in his game to beat those suckers more heavily. However, those
: adjustments are just poker mistakes. For example, you m
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 48 why do you keep saying others' points as nonsense? do you have any respect?
you play your style, others play others, all right? some things maybe we'll
never agree on.
i guess i've said enough and don't want to continue, and wish you good luck!
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: that's your biggest nonsense. There exists a winning strategy in deep
: stack poker against most players like you mentioned or yourself. That
: strategy
: is way more conservative on big bets, which means it doesn't have to win
: as much as some do. That's not because that strategy sucks. that's only
: because
: the sucker play a way more pathetic game and one need to adjust in some
: aspacts in his game to beat those suckers more heavily. However, those
: adjustments are just poker mistakes. For example, you m
|
|
