|
12 Jul 2005, 23:50
|
#1
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
[Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
http://slate.msn.com/id/2122188/entry/2122189/
Quote:
The most successful style of tournament poker is to attack, attack, attack, as often as you can get away with it without losing credibility. If you make them fold, your chances of winning the pot are 100 percent. If you don't, you will have to show the best hand. Passive players are the deadest of the dead money—nobody can win enough showdowns to accumulate their chips that way.
|
I know there are some poker fans in here, and I thought might be interested in this. I can't play worth a damn, but the article was intersting enough to do an idimmu style thread here. I find it interesting how there are professional players who actually make money playing this game. They make enough to support a modest, or sometimes even wealthy, middle class income.
|
|
|
12 Jul 2005, 23:56
|
#2
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
It is precisely that fear of going broke that the good players exploit to grind you away, and I refuse to be exploited like that.
|
Poker is more exciting to read about than to play, as I would lose all my money and it would be no fun at all.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 00:03
|
#3
|
J to the C to the A G E
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Scúnthorpe
Posts: 5,583
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
If you make them fold, your chances of winning the pot are 100 percent.
|
Well duh. Except probability doesn't mean much after the event has occurred.
Quote:
If you don't, you will have to show the best hand.
|
If you show you have the best hand and win, your chances of winning the pot are 100 percent!
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 00:23
|
#4
|
Friendly geek of GD :-/
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On my metal roid
Posts: 923
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
in before dace
__________________
[ »] Entropy increases! :-/
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 01:07
|
#5
|
so f*cking zen
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitting Bottom
Posts: 8,499
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Catch 22
__________________
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 09:42
|
#6
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
You're taking poker tips from the MSN website?
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 12:13
|
#7
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
The most successful style of tournament poker is to attack, attack, attack, as often as you can get away with it without losing credibility. If you make them fold, your chances of winning the pot are 100 percent. If you don't, you will have to show the best hand. Passive players are the deadest of the dead money—nobody can win enough showdowns to accumulate their chips that way..
|
As far as low-limit poker goes, that is so wrong it's scaring.
In low-limit poker, there are players who will call *anything*... "No Fold'em Hold'em". Bluffing and scaring only works when you expect others to behave sanely.
Playing tightly and disciplined, only putting money in the put when you have good enough pot-odds/good hands is the only way to make money in low-limit poker.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 12:34
|
#8
|
Professional AlcoFrolic
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 170
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
How much cash are we talking in low-limit poker?
__________________
I dont drink, I dont smoke, I dont swear... Oh sh*t I left my fags in the pub
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 12:40
|
#9
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
You're taking poker tips from the MSN website?
|
It's not ****ing MSN, it is Slate. Don't be so damned illitarate.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 12:40
|
#10
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Low-limit in is generally considered poker up to $2-4, 3-6, however the game at the lowest tables where the bottom rable is quite different from the "higher low-limit".
I generally play at tables where the big blind is $0.5, so pots generally end up being from 5-10 dollars. Some places have tables with even lower limits though.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 12:41
|
#11
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
As far as low-limit poker goes, that is so wrong it's scaring.
In low-limit poker, there are players who will call *anything*... "No Fold'em Hold'em". Bluffing and scaring only works when you expect others to behave sanely.
Playing tightly and disciplined, only putting money in the put when you have good enough pot-odds/good hands is the only way to make money in low-limit poker.
|
Mother****er, this guy is a professional poker player who has won millions of dollars. You're going to tell me that he is wrong? WTF has your largest winning spree been? 12 pence?
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 13:15
|
#12
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
Mother****er, this guy is a professional poker player who has won millions of dollars. You're going to tell me that he is wrong? WTF has your largest winning spree been? 12 pence?
|
I'm up 200-300 dollars since I started three months ago. Nothing to be espicially proud of in other words.
Either way, he's not talking about low-limit poker you dolt! He's talking about high-limit poker, which is an entirely different game. It's kinda like how teaching 5-year olds advanced football tactics is a ****ing waste.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 13:50
|
#13
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
Low-limit in is generally considered poker up to $2-4, 3-6, however the game at the lowest tables where the bottom rable is quite different from the "higher low-limit".
I generally play at tables where the big blind is $0.5, so pots generally end up being from 5-10 dollars. Some places have tables with even lower limits though.
|
The article is about tournament poker, not ring games. Your points are correct for a ring game but not for any sort of tournament, even play money.
Tight-Aggressive is the way to win tournaments, going all in with 27o is gutsy but (almost always) dumb unless you really have a very good read on your playing partners.
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 14:09
|
#14
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
I wasn't advocating not playing tight aggressive.
I was merely making a point of the fact that in low-limit, the tight part is alot more important than the aggressive part. On really low-limit the majority of plays go to showdown, regardless of how much money is in the pot.
[edit]
If you know you're going to get called, you don't play unless you think you have the best hand. And if you think you have the best hand, it's not really bluffing is it? This holds wether it's tourney play or not, just as long as there are enough bad players left still.
As anecdotal evidence of how different low-limit is to real poker: I have two friends who are part time proffesional poker players. When we joined up with alot of non-poker players and even more alcohol for an evening of poker they got creamed. They expected the others to play anything near sane.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 14:53
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,476
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
As anecdotal evidence of how different low-limit is to real poker: I have two friends who are part time proffesional poker players. When we joined up with alot of non-poker players and even more alcohol for an evening of poker they got creamed. They expected the others to play anything near sane.
|
"The other players were too bad at the game for me to beat them :(((("
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 15:43
|
#16
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
I wasn't advocating not playing tight aggressive.
I was merely making a point of the fact that in low-limit, the tight part is alot more important than the aggressive part. On really low-limit the majority of plays go to showdown, regardless of how much money is in the pot.
|
That still doesn't really apply to tournaments, even in a $5+.50 sit and go you need to be aggressive if you want to consistently win. In tournaments people tend to forget about the stakes altogether, it's all about the chips.
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 16:07
|
#17
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gayle29uk
That still doesn't really apply to tournaments, even in a $5+.50 sit and go you need to be aggressive if you want to consistently win. In tournaments people tend to forget about the stakes altogether, it's all about the chips.
|
Sure, when there's 3-4 left and people are starting to get a look at the money, you have to crank up the aggressivness alot and start stealing. You'll still have a decent chance with being tight-passive though, as it really fools alot of players. They just keep betting with nothing to try and get you to fold
The majority of the sit'n'go however, will be with 5+ players and things *will* get called. Thight-aggressive - sure, sure. Bluffing - forget it, you're welcome to try though.
Incidently, I don't play anything else than $5 + .50 sit'n'go's nowadays.
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 21:41
|
#18
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
The majority of the sit'n'go however, will be with 5+ players and things *will* get called. Thight-aggressive - sure, sure. Bluffing - forget it, you're welcome to try though.
|
Out of curiosity, where do you play? You describe the ring games at pokerroom.com perfectly but the tournaments seem a lot tighter to me. You're definitely not talking about pokerstars.com, that's one tough site for ring games!
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
13 Jul 2005, 22:03
|
#19
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
empire/party poker mostly nowadays. High rake for the lowest games, but it makes up for it by the sheer amount of bad players.
Played at little at expekt earlier, and tried crazypoker a little too. Expekt had too many europeans / not enough americans though. Since I'm a mediocre player at best, I need bad opposition
You? Got any recommandations?
|
|
|
14 Jul 2005, 09:26
|
#20
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
I usually play at pokerroom, mainly because of the Java client (I use Linux) and the play tends to be pretty loose. The tournaments are a bit tighter but if you can get a read on your fellow players quickly then you should be able to deal with the maniacs and push them out pretty easily. I'm not a great player, like you I'm mediocre at best but I manage to make a small steady profit. Party Poker has the reputation for the loosest games on the net but the client doesn't work under Wine
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
14 Jul 2005, 19:23
|
#21
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Dual boot for the win! .. and it isn't like windows cost any money .. in fact, I'm sure people would pay to get rid of their windows ME installation discs.
I generally do all my usefull stuff on linux, and have windows for whenever I want to waste time... works out pretty well.
|
|
|
14 Jul 2005, 19:28
|
#22
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
oh, and whoever neg repped me:
Quote:
You are a moron, I will now add you to my list of people to regularly neg rep, which at 20-30 points per rep wont be cheap.
|
You forgot to sign it
|
|
|
14 Jul 2005, 19:35
|
#23
|
I am.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,580
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
oh, and whoever neg repped me:
You forgot to sign it
|
now.
you know it wasn't me, because i've rep'd you twice now (even though you've neg rep'd me a lot, i rep for quality of posts you see)
and somebody does just have to point out that:
Quote:
You are a moron, I will now add you to my list of people to regularly neg rep, which at 20-30 points per rep wont be cheap.
|
technically he doesn't have to leave his name, because he knows who you are.
but
if you are interested in who he is 20/30 points means 2000 to 3000 posts, or 2000 to 3000 rep points or most likely a combination of the two.
god. i'm turning nice. i feel dirty
__________________
hi
|
|
|
14 Jul 2005, 19:46
|
#24
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Re: [Poker]The 2005 World Series of Poker
thanks..
the neg rep: occasionally, you annoy me
I just find the whole neg-repping without a name to be extremely bad form. If you don't like someone / their posts, owe up to it.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:05.
| |