Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Springboard. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
If you could model your poker play after someone..; Who would it be?
Topic Started: Dec 21 2007, 03:06 PM (409 Views)
The_Immortal_DJINN
Lords of the 17th Chamber of Maggots
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
OK, Chrstmas is over, and now I can address all of what's been said thus far. Forgive the cherry picking on responses, there's a lot to cover----


"How about someone calling a raise and a re-raise pre-flop with 7-2 Off, only to flop Quads.... Yeah, I did that this past trip to Bombers... Was it a -EV move? Definately. I was speculating for a big hand vs good cost-profit comparisions."

*****Well, hell man, you said it yourself. It was a -EV move. Sure you got lucky...REALLY lucky for the short term. But by continuing to make -EV moves, you will continue to solidify yourself as a long term loser regardless of whether or not it is tournament or cash game. I would normally ask for specific numbers, but in this case I'm pretty certain I don't need them. There would need to be overwhelming reasons for me to call a 3 way raise and re-raise with 7-2. Fundamentally, it's a bad move, due to the fact that not only are you risking chips with the worst hand in the game, but you are calling a raise and a re-raise with the worst hand in the game. You know you are playing a bad game if you are trying to justify playing 7-2. If you'd like I can give you all of the reasons why this was an exceptionally bad move, but hopefully you can trust me that when facing a raise and re-raise, even when in position, that you should fold 100% of the time. The odds of your 7-2 winning vs. any two random hands are not enough to justify risking any amount of your chips. When you can ignore the results, be it positive or negative, and focus on making fundamentally good decisions, only then will you see long term success. Granted, in your case, that may only mean a nice string of bar tabs, lol.*****


"It wasn't 1/2 of my chips... It was closer to 1/3 of my Chips, maybe. More likely, it was for ~1/4th. Yes, it was a questionable call. Yes, I know that I was getting it in with the worst of it, before making that call. The thing is... In tournaments, you want to be actively busting people out when you have that opportunity too do so, and if it's only 1/4 or less of my chip stack too do so, I'm usually okay with taking a 35% shot at doing so. That's something that I've been looking at doing more and more as of late. Taking that gamble, in order to bust someone out from a tournament, in order to improve my own tournament positioning."


*****First of all, I remember distinctly, when you called my all-in, you risked just under half your chips to call my all-in with J-3 of spades. I realized that by winning the blinds at this point would be fine, and that anything less than an all-in, say a 3x or 4x bet, would commit me anyway. I went all in to maximize my EV. At best, you have a 35% chance at winning, however, the probability of it dictates that you are likely in a worse spot than 35%. I agree that actively trying to bust people is a big part of tournament play....ONLY if it makes fundamental sense to do so. The chance was there to bust me, that much is certain, but you missed a step prior to making that call-----placing me on a range of hands and understanding your risk of chips versus the likelyhood of your hand actually holding up. If you stopped to think about it, you'd realize that there are better spots to pick, and calling was probably an unnecessary risk at that point in the tournament. By making these fundamentally incorrect decisions, you may get lucky and see some positive and oddsbusting short term results. But the math catches up. I'll continue to make +EV moves at every point in my tournament and cash game play. You continue to justify playing -EV hands. I'm all for this plan.*****


"Now... Would I make this same kind of move in a cash game? Not bloody likely. Afterall, it is a -EV poker play that I'm making by doing so. In tournaments, I feel that this has valid strategic value. In cash games, it's a losing proposition."

*****Just so you know, -EV is -EV. There is no "special" -EV. There's no -EV exemption or exception. There's no such thing as "a little bit pregnant". Making a -EV move is still a -EV move. Your logic is that you are willing to risk your chips making a -EV move to eliminate a competitor. If we multiplied the times you made a -EV decision to eliminate a player and looked at that data, you will find that more often than not, the result is that you have lost chips the majority of the time and only eliminated that competitor a minority of the time.*****


"Here's a good example:
http://www.pokerhand.org/?1680605"

*****This is a bad example. He's not calling an all-in pre-flop with this hand. Yes, he called a pre-flop raise out of position with a questionable hand, but in his defense, he already had part of the raise covered with his big blind, and it was not terribly damaging to his stack to see if the flop connects with his hand. Now he got a bit overzealous with the flop, as his read was likely that his opponent had AK/AQ, but that can be chalked up to a simple misread (never said Huck Seed was the best of players).*****


"While Sklanky's good at reading people and explaining how too do it... He's not a very effective tournament poker player, and definately never in the money when he's actively trying to win. He's flat out ... "Too Tight" to ever actually win."

*****Chris, David Sklansky doesn't even play in tournaments. He will rarely play in them because he is a cash game specialist. But that doesn't mean that his knowledge is worthless. Granted, he doesn't play in bar tournaments, but I can say that he places most of his receptive readers on a better fundamental path. If all you pay attention too are results and pro names, may I introduce you to Dan Harrington? Someone who fully advocates Sklansky's theories and uses them liberally throughout his HOH volumes?*****

In conclusion, Chris, no you've made no negative or demeaning comments or actions towards any of the players at the game, and because of this, you are always welcome to the game. Judging from what I've seen from you thus far, I think it's clear that unless you change the way you think about and subsequently play the game of poker, I will always wish to play with you in a poker tournament and will rely on you as my potential "double up" man. On the other hand, you actually displayed some very disciplined skill in the cash game, and I would be more wary of you in a cash game scenario.


DJINN


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
« Previous Topic · Gambling · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Theme made by Sionthede of the ZBTZ.