![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
growing up in great brittain i have played far more pot/nl than mr. malmuth. i make no comments about limit poker as i don't play that watered down game. he should not comment about big bet poker unless it is his primary game. i made no comments as to the quality of this forum i beleive it is superb. that is why mason's uninformed comments seem out of place. if you want to play big bet poker with me i will begin touring australia next week. g'day mate.
Whoever it was that bad-mouthed limon I think you need to learn some manners. I just want to thank whoever that was for not respecting someone else's opinion whatsoever. Mason can be open to criticism just as much as you or me buddy. He questioned Mason's merits as a no limit player and if Mason wants to respond (if he hasn't already....) then he will do so and defend his play as a NL player. Why don't you, STAY THE FUCK OUT OF IT! Limon proceed with your questioning.
=)
May I ask why it matters whether it is more difficult to play Limit poker or Pot/No Limit? It seems a bit like asking whether it is more difficult to learn Japanese or Chinese. If you want to live in Japan....
Superficially it seems to a Pot-Limit player (like me) that Limit is an easier game because there are so many opponents making so many mistakes, but after a while you start to wonder whether they are all mistakes after all. Later you start wondering whether you are making similar 'mistakes'. Eventually you want to make more of these 'mistakes' and suddenly you have called into question much of your belief in what is correct strategy!
I think it is far harder to maintain discipline while playing Limit. What surprises Pot-limit players is that there is so much literature about the Limit game, especially the correct pre-flop strategy. What is even more surprising is that so many people seem not to have consulted it!
The thing that many people like about the Pot-Limit game is that you can win back a loss in one big hand. When I have been abroad and played Limit, I have had occasions when I have gone 60 big bets behind and wondered why I should continue. How does one motivate oneself!
David Young, London, England
I would liken great limit players to professional baseball players in the minor leagues. They can execute every type of play for their style (or positon in baseball) without error on a great percentage. I would liken great no limit players (particularly the tournament players) to professional baseball players in the major leagues. They can can execute every play for their style (or position) with a great percentage of accuracy also. The catch, however, is that the no limit players have a greater understanding of the game and the psychology of the other players involved. Just like the big time baseball players they bring an element of thought to the game that is a cut above the rest.
Some of you limit players might find my views highly disturbing, but regardless of what you post to tell me how wrong I am, I believe I am right. There comes a time in poker when enough theory is enough, and it's time to just start playing the game (just keep practicing until you make a better grade of play.) You have to change your style of play around until you master them all.
The one thing that's wrong with the strategies laid out in literature today, is how inflexible it is. Your strategy, no matter how much you try to change it, will always have too many restrictions on aspects that are labeled erratic. It's too damn hard to say what an error is in poker. When bluffing is half the game I don't see how a lot of things could be considered an error. Today's theory doesn't take the situation (and the people) into account nearly enough.
You can't try to bluff correctly by bluffing once every seven hands as a general guideline to bluffing! That's absurd! If you catch a wave of hot cards it's a smarter play to ride even your bad cards on the high tide. You gotta start bluffing until you're called down on a run like that. Damn the odds, you've got people that are scared shitless of you and you have to take full advantage of it.
Doyle Brunson wasn't a good player (theoretically) but damn he sure was a great player. He was way ahead of his time and he had one of the most remarkable understandings of poker psychology i've ever seen. Just something to think about.
The attitude you describe is the philosopy of the Indian Casinos in California.
After playing limit for some time, I'd like to move onto no-limit. I had heard in the past about Super/System and was about to buy a copy last night, but then I read this post. While I will still buy SS very soon, who has written a good text of no-limit?
Mr E Tombs
The no-limit advice in Super/System has done alright by me over the years. 15 years of Florida home games, and 6 years of small blind Las Vegas no-limit (though I play limit too ), and the book has paid for itself many times over.
Do yourself a favor. If you get SS, make sure you spend the extra $20 and get the Guide to SS. It updates a lot of the text.
Also, get TJ's big bet book, make sure it's the no-limit/pot-limit book,for he also has other titles out.
Dont forget the Coach's big bet poker book too.
Good Luck
Howard
PS
I know that some people don't care for one or two of the above books, but they are all written by top players. If nothing else it is nice to see how the thinking process works among the various authors. In my opinion,all three books have,at the very least, some worthwhile information in them (to put it mildly).
Thank you very much, Howard. I am waiting for a catalogue from a gambling book store that has SS.
I'm not exactly which TJ you are mentioning, but I'll try to post if I cannot determine which are good options.
CHAMPIONSHIP NO-LILIT & POT-LIMIT HOLD'EM, not to be confused with CHAMPIONSHIP HOLD'EM.
Don't forget to get GUIDE TO SS as well. If you can't find it, let me know.
Don't forget about the Coach.
Good Luck
Howard
This was my first trip into 2+2 and I was very surprised to see all these posts. I'll try to clarify some of these remarks. I never said S/S was outdated. The fundamentals are the same, and will always be the same. As many of the posters pointed out, the blind structure has changed and you DO have to adjust your play. But, if I remember correctly, [its been a 1/4 of a century] I said that the ante determines how you play. Also, how many players are in the game, and who they are determines how you play. So, even in "the old days" you had to adjust your play. Next, everybody wrote their own chapter, even though Alan Goldberg interpreted some of the collaborators thoughts into more understandable lanuage. Also, Mike Caro helped Joey Hawthorne immensely with the lowball section, because Joey wasn't very dependable. I wrote ALL of the no-limit and am still very proud of it. Also, is Alan Goldberg Dead? I haven't heard from him or heard anything about him in 20 years.==Doyle Brunson
Thank you verry much for taking the time out of your busy life to respond to my inquiry. The prospect that you could answer questions and clarify concepts will hopefully, make my forthcoming copy of SS even more valuable. I've also heard that Caro's guide to SS is very worthwhile because the concepts in SS are so advanced. Would you tell us what your opinion of the supplement is? Have you read any other books on no-limit? What do you think of them? Once again, thank you very much Doyle and I hope you continue to corespond with us in the future.
the nuts refers to the best hand possible, a sure lock to win the pot. In holdem suppose the board reads KsJc8d4sJs at the river. If you have the two remaining Jacks in the hole, or pocket, you have an unbeatable hand (four jacks). If you have two kings in the pocket, you would have 2nd nuts, or the second best possible hand (Kings full of jacks). If you had KJ, you would have the third best possible hand (jacks full of kings). Forth best nut's would be J8 (jacks full of eights), fifth would be J4 (jacks full of fours), sixth would be 88 (eights full of jacks), seventh would be 44 (fours full of jacks).
Next would be the spade flushes. If you have the ACE of spades with any other spade in your hand you would have the NUT flush, of course as you can see with the pair on the board, this flush may be no good. 2nd nut flush would be QsXs. Notice a straight flush is not possible. Also notice a simple straight is not possible either.
The nut's can change as the hand progresses. In this example, pocket kings are the nuts on the flop and turn (three kings), but when the jacks pair on the river then pocket jacks are the final and unbeatable nuts.
What part of the country hill? Never heard anyone in this area on the board.
n/t
Another solution is to set a starting amount that you can bring it in for anytime. For instance, you might make a rule that you can always bring the pot in for $10 straight. If several people limp, then you can bring it in for more of course, but a minimum bring in is helpful (and speeds the game up).
Another good rule is round up dollar chips. We don't have any pl games with less than five/10 blinds, but we have a rule that you can always bet $50 straight and after the flop we round up odd $5 chips to $25.
2-3-5 no limit game, stack sizes are around 300. This is a short 5 handed game.
I raise in the cutoff with ATo. My strategy in this shorthanded game is generally to put the decision to my opponents EVERY time I have position preflop.
Anyway, to make it quick, it turned out the board had 2 to a flush and I thought my A high was good on the turn. Now, in the instance where my opponent has a flush draw and a pair draw against me, his odds should be the same as if I flopped a flush draw with two overcards to pair, right?
Anyway, if I have a reasonable certainty that my A high is good on the turn against a flush draw, should I move in on him? that's what I did. He checked the turn (there was some betting on the flop) and I KNEW he had the draw, so I moved in figuring I could win right there but knowing he most likely needed help to win if called.
He called me and it turns out I was right. And my A high held up. Obviously, calling on his part was a terrible play but I'm wondering what you think of my play.
natedogg
"My strategy in this shorthanded game is generally to put the decision to my opponents EVERY time I have position preflop."
I think you are on to a winning agressive strategy but remember you can't do anything EVERY time a certain situation comes up or your better opponents will chop you down. You can "walk back to Houston with AT as easily as AK". Didn't you put all your money in with no real overlay?
Don't get me wrong, I instictively think the type of heart you show is essential to successful big bet poker and of course my two cents is just that, two cent.
Glad your Ace held up- Nice pot huh? :o)
You were bluffing, essentially. You absolutely did not want a call. If you think he's going to fold, that's fine. If you think he's going to call because he's a fish and he'll always call with a flush draw, then don't make the bet, IMO. Because, what if he has the flush draw AND a small pair? E.g., what if he has Kh9h and the board is Qs9d7h3h? Now you're drawing, and you only have 4 outs. While this may not happen a lot, when it does, you're in a big losing spot. Take the free card, and win in a check-down on the river. It sounds like the pot is big enough since you raised preflop and there was flop action. However, if you can rely upon your read 100%, then your play is fine.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
why take an unnecessary risk for your whole stack. I like Greg's idea of checking it down. This guy was clearly a fish, you definately can wait for better spots.
Actually he was on tilt and I didn't realize it. But, normally an all-in bet like that would have pushed him off anything besides top pair.
If I'm reasonably sure my A high is good, is this a value bet?
natedogg
I only use the phrase "bet for value" for river-betting. With cards to come, betting with an easily outdrawn best hand in NL is more like a "protection" bet. On the river it's offense, on the turn it's defense. Using one phrase for both situations is confusing to me.
In any case, it sound to me like you made a perfect read and a perfect bet. But maybe I'm just being results oriented.
Tommy
Weekly home game, $5-10 Blinds, NL, mostly HE & Omaha/8. While the game starts off "friendly" enough, with $100 buy-in, usually about $10k on the table once the game gets going and a few re-buys are made.
My problem - while I consistently win, I feel like I'm usually "playing in the shadows". My big hands don't get paid off, most people won't make big "value bets" into me as they know I hold good cards, and I only steal a few hands a night.
My thoughts on how to change my image, and improve my win rate (and variance)- 1) look for opportunities to re-raise the most aggressive player in the game, hoping to re-steal his steals; 2) lose my fear of taking a big loss. When I get down $500 or more, I usually only rebuy $100-300 at a time. The "big" players will rebuy for as much as anyone else has. I should rebuy $1,000 or enough to "cover" the biggest stack.
Criticism of my ideas and suggestions wanted.
If they're not paying you off, then you should start stealing a bit more, especially semi-bluffing. Until they start to call you down more often, steal more and more. Eventually, you'll be stealing so much that you'll be the big winner, or you will achieve a better balance of getting called on your big hands.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Thanks for the comments. Update-
Played again last night - again, grinded out decent win. But I did the two things that I mentioned- After I was in and lost $500, bought $1,000. Got some interesting looks. Helped out when I caught a hand.
Also, was waiting for the opportunity to play back at the aggressive guy. I was in BB, one caller, late position raise $50 by aggressive. All fold back to me. I reraise $100 w 6h-3h. The one caller (fortunately) folded. Aggressive called (we both had about $1,500 left). Flop actually helped me, 6c, 7h, 4h - but I planned on betting $300 no matter. Agg guy folds. It was a rush for me to do this.
It's not like I don't steal any pots (in the Blinds with no raise before flop-steal a nothing flop, or from late position when everybody checks), but I want to learn to do more than just take a pot nobody else wants.
Any other suggestions on what situations to be on the lookout for would be helpful.
Learn to "play rushes".
When you win a pot (especially a big one), temporarily take on an attitude of ferocious frivolity and make sure you're in there stealing the next one...and the next one....and the next one....and the next one....until someone starts to play back at you. Lean on the pot.
Show'em that you're very capable of being greedy. You'd be surprised how many pots they'd surrender to you.
your problem stems from the way you buy in and rebuy it is obvoius you are playing wirh scared money and are in way over your head. you are an easy read. minimum buy in for a 5-10nl is $1500, more realistically you should be able to cover the biggest stacks even if they are $3000 or more. if you cant do this you are playing at a massive disadvantage because yo have to play CARDS and the other players can play YOU.
he's playing with their money. The best way to win is to do as Greg says. There are two people who know....Abdul in limit poker, and Greg for everything else.
Your 6 3 suited hand may have been exhilarating, but this type of play is suicide. You were lucky enough to flop a killer hand, pair and flush draw. Were you willing to cold bluff the hand out if you missed the flop.
I think it's a mistake to play stupid starting hands as a way to create a better image. There are much better ways to change your image.
As far as the buy-in situation goes, I like to play small buyins early. I've come to do this for several reasons. One reason is that the small stacks have a technical advantage. In a big multiway pot where you are all in, you get to see all the cards. Someone who has a big stack may release a hand that would have won due to a side bet.
The main reason, though, is that I play a small stack much differently than I would play a big stack--so much so that I'm almost a completely different player. Since I play with a lot of the same people all the time, it's much more important to make it hard for them to adjust to your play.
What part of the country are you from gcgang? Sounds like your games are similar to ours.
I am new to L.A. and am used to PL,NL games in vegas, AZ. and home games. While playing NL at the hustler and the bike I attempted to straddle in my usual fashion; posting twice the big blind before the deal and reserving the right to act last before the flop. both times i was greated with a mix of disgust, dismay and bewilderment. nobody in either game had ever heard of this practice others told me it was illegal in CA. is this correct? Am I out of line? What is the ruling?
they let you do it right? i mean, i think it's allowed at those casinos, i dont see why not.
it upsets people cause theyre afraid youll be doing a lot of bluffing, it disguises your hand if you do see the flop, it keeps them from seeing the flop for cheap. you already know all this if youre live straddling.
it takes a really skilled player to understand how to use a live straddle to their advantage. it also encourages people to try to bluff you. tricky stuff, usually only fishy gamblers like this play, but i have seen lately where a good player could throw this play in for deception and other reasons.
anyone else have thoughts on live straddles??
When the pot limit HE game gets spread at Casino AZ (which is rare) there seem to be about 2-3 straddles per round, usually by the better, more aggressive players. I have yet to decide whether they are helping or hurting themselves by doing this. I see the upside and the downside of doing it, but I can't convince myself that it would be right for me to do in the game.
I've seen this done by good players in PL games also, and I'm not sure what the advantage is. It would allow the pot to get larger faster, and therefore let the straddler raise more to protect his hand, but if the other players can afford it, so what?
Another advantage might be that you are more likely to shut out the blinds, but if you have a blind hand yourself, so what?
If you can live straddle from any position, then it's called a kill. I'm not sure if that is what eighb was talking about. If so, then all the no limit games in NorCal are played with a kill. In fact, I was surprised when I played NL at the Strat and they had no idea there what a kill was. Maybe this rule is a NorCal phenomenon only.
The skilled player can make great use of a kill and I've seen tables where the professionals are jockeying with each other to get the kill out there first. There is definitely a TREMENDOUS advantage to a good player if he can kill from round back, giving him last action preflop. Letting the blinds act behind you even when you're the button is a way of mitigating the strength of position, even if it's only for one round. By posting a kill, you have best position EVERY round, even preflop, and in NL/PL this extra round of position can be crucial.
I'm sure Tommy Angelo could write about this for 10 pages or so. But believe me, a good player who knows what he's doing and has an aggressive style can dominate a game by killing it every time he has late position. I'm not one of those players.
natedogg
Unfortunately I was off the night you were in the Stratosphere. I was actually in the room and overheard the conversation you had with Stan (poker room manager). I think a kill is probably more common northern Cal since it comes from draw poker (I have never played draw in a casino, so I don't knnow exactly how the kill works but I think you get to look at a portion of your hand and you can post a kill if you want). As far as adding a kill to our game I don't see doing that at anytime in the future. We have a succesful game that we don't plan to change it.
Randy Refeld Tower poker room
straddle is only right for me if it puts me in controll of the action and makes others react to me and not the other way around. when others are reacting to you and you get last action you are at a huge advantage. it is much different than posting a blind, no one is reacting to a blind. the object of NL is to break yur opponents. calling from seat 1 with 66 will not be as likely to break anyone in an unraised pot as straddling, finding 66 and flopping a set. when you bet out after the flop you are likely to get multiple loose calls and possibly a very aggressive move for the pot right into your set. plus if you straddle and everyone just calls i will often raise before the flop with any two cards and see who in the game has some heart or gamble in them. if someone raises my straddle i might fold or call with a hand like 45s now im in position to break someone and thats what i'm there for.in a word straddling causes "stress" to your opponents, i like stressed opponents.
A few years ago at Hollywood Park, a player wanted to straddle in the 40-80 game. They let him do it, but the straddle was not live, he couldn't raise off of it. It was just a blind raise. Didn't stop him from doing it every time, though.
I'll ask the floorman when I go there today.
Ali at Hollywood Park says that Live straddles are not allowed there, by casino rule, and are not allowed at any other clubs in the LA area that he is aware of.
I haven't played in So. CA, but I know that live straddles in No. CA clubs is legal. I've heard from some players that the live straddle is one of the stupidest bets that a player can make. I tend to agree with this for several reasons.
First of all, why invest in 2 SB when you are likely to end up with a trashy hand like 38o? If there is a raise behind you, then most players tend to protect this live bet by calling with a very bad hand that they can only win with a lucky flop.
And secondly, you are in bad position.
Of course, there are times when you end up with a well, disguised premium hand. Other times, everyone may just fold to you. Nevertheless, I think the cons in this situation outweigh the pros.
I don't play NL or PL, so the situation may be very different there as some of the responses have posted.
Anyone have some thoughts on this? In the long run, is it profitable to post a consisent live straddle?
In a limit game, I think it is a total waste. In a PL or NL game, it is much more valuable, as you can really manipulate the size of the pot this way.
If it is a straddle, placed by the person next after the big blind, I think it is not terribly useful. Some very good and very aggressive players might do well with it, but most winning players will win less if they do it. If it is a kill that can placed from any position, then it is probably the right play from very late position.
Here is my understanding of kills in PL/NL games, which may be wrong. If more than one person wants to do it, then the person in earliest position get to do it, and nobody else. Also, I've heard of rooms where it is not allowed from the button, but is allowed from the UTG seat up to the cutoff seat. Finally, I have heard of games where the earliest position player who elects to do so may kill the pot, but then anyone behind him can choose to rekill the pot (by posting double the kill). The rekill is subject to the same rules as the kill. Also, once the earliest position killer is determined, they cannot withdraw their kill just because someone behind them has rekilled. Of course, all that really matters is that you learn the rules of the room you're playing in.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
5-10 PLO, I've got about 1200 or so and the other player in the hand has like 400.
I'm in the cutoff and bring it in for a raise to 40 w/ AdJdThTd. The button calls as does the SB.
Flop comes AT4 suits unimportant. Check to me and I bet the pot of 130 w/ middle set (AA 95% gets a preflop raise in this game). Button calls and blind folds.
Turn is offsuit J. I can't think this is a good card for me, I check and Button pushes in. Button is a loose player who'd probably push in w/ anything from Aces up to nuts here. I figured since he was betting about 200 into a 360 pot, I had 10 outs for the whole pot and another 3 for a split if he had the straight and I was ahead if he didn't - no way he had A's.
I call and he shows me the straight - no K or pair and I lose.
Comments?
Not a vastly experienced pot limit player (ok, never played), but I do see one minor flaw in your reasoning. You say you have 10 outs, twoof your outs are in your hand. On the river, you have 2 ace outs, one ten out, 3 four outs, 2 jack outs, for only 8 outs for the whole pot. I also don't follow how you have any straight draw, since you have A-J-10-10 and the board is A-J-10-4. With only 8 outs, you have only 5.5-1 chance to hit assuming all your outs are live. Given that the pot is 560 and you need to call 200, your pot odds are only 2.8-1 if he has the straight.
Of course, I think there is a typo in your post and you have a Q instead of a J. In that case, you have slightly better odds, but I still think you should be folding.
David
Have you misdescribed your hand or the board? You only had 8 outs for a house and none for a tying straight if the board was AT4J on 4th street and your hand was AJTT.
If you had 10 outs to win and 3 outs to tie then you about had pot odds to call, assuming the other player had a straight. If there was a decent chance he had some other hand, then you had an easy call.
Oh no!! Not again!
2 questions...3-6 no-foldem
1. I hold KdTd in BB. 6 limp, I check. Flop comes Ks8d6d. I bet it out as I know I'll get some callers behind me. Sure enough 4 call. Turn comes 5c. I bet again, 2 call. River comes Jc. I bet it out get one caller, utg, the worst player in the game. I show my hand, and he takes it down with runner runner two pr. J5o. My question is should I have attempted to check raise the flop to get him to fold? And should I have checked the river with my weak kicker? Before you guys answer, I repeatedly punished UTG with better kickers the whole night as he often plays trash like K7o...etc.
2. I hold KK on button. 7 limp, I limp to hide the strength of my hand. Flop comes 665 suits dont matter. BB bets, UTG raises, everyone folds and its up to me. BB and UTG are both very aggressive, and I doubt either one actually has the 6. Thus with my position, I smooth call and wait for the turn to raise as I know a reraise here will do no good. I wait for 4th street, and it comes a 8. BB checks, UTG bets, I ask for time and raise. BB folds, and UTG calls. river comes a J. He checks, I bet, he raises. Do i call 6 more for a large pot? Do u think he has a better hand? Results posted later.
.
blinds are 1,2,4. i open raise on the button for 25$ with AK hearts. is 25$ to big of a raise for 7$ worth of blinds??. the small blind re-raised 325$. i think for a bit and fold. im new to this game and dont know any of the players. once i folded he showed my queens. anyone have any thoughts of my raise and my fold? thx in advance.
eom=end of message
I don't like over-raising the pot. In my experience, a pot-sized raise will win the blinds almost as often as an oversized raise, but at a lower risk. If you expect a call and are just building a pot, then we're talking about a different situation.
The reraise by QQ is horrible. He's risking $325 to win $32, and he's only going to get played with if you have AA or KK, in which case he's hurting.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I see what you mean by the oversize button raise on the preflop action. Would you normally just call the four and then raise eleven for a total risk of 15 dollars? (no matter what raising hand you hold?)I guess I didn't mind gunners raise as it was only 10 dollars more and since he was in blind steal position maybe an agressive opponent might decide to defend with a lessor hand (KQ or Axs, etc.)
Given equal stack sizes and an unknown opponent, and say you did raise 15 on the button with your AK, what is the most re-raise you would stand pre-flop with said holding? TIA
There is no specific number. It depends upon how deep we are, and who the raiser is. If it was a proportional raise (pot-sized or less), I probably at least call, sometimes raise again, almost never fold. If it's an oversized raise, it really depends upon the person.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Pot limit game. 5-10 blinds. I'm UTG with AcKc. I raise to $40. A world class player (WCP) makes it $140 in the 7th position. Two callers, including the big blind. Flop is 9c 6c 2c. Perfect flop for me. Knowing the WCP will bet, I check. Sure enough he bets $500. Both other players fold.
He has about $700 left. I can cover it. Should I raise now or wait for the turn to get it all in? Will he bet the turn if I check? What is my best play?
I'll post what I did and the results later.
This is a huge "it depends". At this point you would think he has an overpair, and maybe 999 a small fraction of the time. He could also have AK nothing, and occasionally worse.
If he has nothing, he's always going to fold to a reraise now. If he has an overpair, he will sometimes fold, depending upon him and his thoughts about you. If he has 999, he'll probably always call (he should).
So, the real questions are how often will he call with an overpair if you raise now, and how often will he bet again with any of his hands if you just call now?
Estimate these answers, and then you'll know what to do. Against an unknown opponent (pretending it's my first hand at the table), I will probably raise now, as he might call with hands like QQ and JJ that include a club.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
the other day i am at foxwoods sittin at a 40-80 holdem table, i was pullin hands out of my ass all nightand was up like 600, i had the nuts flop every other hand, one hand i was dealt two blacks in the hole, 2 and 7, i raised and reraisde untill it was just me and some guy named willy small kock, this guy was a cup mean, the flop came white, black , black, i was one from the flusher and i knew he had a straight,teh 4th mean,..black.. i bet and he went "1...2..all in" and i called the nice, then came the river touch, black, i get the flush i flop my nuts on the table and took it down, this guy was real straight callin my nuts with a straight draw i couldnt beleive how mean he was. i came out up like 1..2..grand
So are you going to post the punch line in the follow up?
This play is covered in HPFAP21, in fact I think you have quoted directly from the book without permission.
This play is covered in HPFAP21, in fact I think you have quoted directly from the book without permission.
Not a chance; the book is in english.
Fat-Charlie
This goes in my top ten responses to idiot posts!
(actually my list is only at two right now, and haven't ranked them)
i feel dumber now that i have read that post. someone please kill this person. it will benefit the world.
-Broken Arm
he will keep posting.
Every popular newsgroup on usenet has one of these. They feed on the responses you post to their messages. If you don't feed them, they get hungry and go to find another forum to bother.
Read here for more information on trolls
http://digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
If you are using an internet translation program then get a new one or find someone who speaks your language to translate for you. These mean nut cup stories are getting old.
I was playing in a 2-3-5 NL home game last night. Several hands came up against the same player, and I'm just going to throw my thinking out there and see what y'all have to say about.
Across the table from me was a good (better than I), really agressive player. Call him Loo. Multiple times, I'd had a good but not great hand (top pair medium kicker, and such) and he'd driven me off of them with a big raise. I'd also seen him get caught making a similar move on another player, so I know that he raises big when he senses weakness, and doesn't need cards to do it.
With all that in mind, I get ATs two off the button. Folded to me, and I raise to 20, thinking I'll take the $10 in blinds. Loo calls on the button, BB calls.
Flop comes 7 high, with one of my suit. Checked to me, I bet around 30. Loo thinks for a while, and raises another 50. I have maybe 400, he covers me.
At this point, I don't put him on a hand at all. I think he (correctly, more or less) put me on a steal, and is restealing. So I think about it, and just call. This both looks strong, and doesn't put too much money at risk. Turn is a T. (Woo!) I check intending to check-raise-take-down-the-pot, and he checks behind me. River puts some ridiculous straight on the board, but there's no chance he has that. I bet the pot, he thinks and thinks and calls. My AT takes it.
So I didn't have much of a hand there. I didn't think he had much of one either. Given that he called, he had *something*, which means that I sucked out on him. On the other hand, more of the money went in after I was ahead than before.
A bit later, I'm now ahead of him, with my 600 or so to his 400. I raise from late position with QQ, $20 to go. Loo calls from a blind. Flop is A73 rainbow. He checks, I bet $40. He thinks (he thinks a lot, it turns out) and flat calls. This makes me suspicious. With an A, he bets out or check-raises. There's no draw that he could have that he'd chase there. And he certainly isn't stealing...
Turn is a 4, a blank in this situations, I think. He checks, I check behind him. River is a Q. (Rah!)
He bets out $75. I am now totally sure I am ahead, and think, count chips, generally look lost, and eventually raise all in. He thinks and thinks, stares at me while I try to look nervous, and eventually calls with A7 for $250 more.
As a side note, as I'm about to turn my hand over, another player at the table says, "QQ. Totally obvious." This impressed me.
Anyways.
Both times, I sucked out. In the case of QQ, I sucked out pretty badly. Both times, though, he called with pretty marginal hands, and both times, lots more money went in *after* I was ahead. If I don't hit the Q, I lose the $60 I put into the pot. But instead I won several hundred.
So is this the way that NL is supposed to work? My feeling is that a basic feature of good players is that they bluff lots at small pots, steal when they can, but manage to have the best hand when lots of money goes into the pot.
The trick seems to be to balance the agression needed to do well overall with the hand reading skills and card quality needed to take down the large pots. In some games, the large pots are so big that all you have to do is wait for cards, but that doesn't seem to be the case in many of the NL games I play.
Ok, so I've babbled on long enough. Is my thinking good on this stuff?
- target
Oh yeah. Nate, where the heck were you last night? I wanted that bounty!
- target
I couldn't make it. lucky for you! :)
natedogg
2-3-5 home game? When and where and I want to play too! Man, sounds like fun. I got some Humboldt County, uh, well, you know.
As to NL poker, the phrase "suck out" has a different meaning there than in limit, at least to me. It means, "putting long money in with the worst of it and coming out with the best of it."
By that definition, the QQ hand was definitely not a suck out, and the first hand was a marginal one. Do you see what I'm getting at?
If I give a free card to a two-outter and he hits, I don't feel like I got sucked out on. ("Sucked out on" --- is that English?)
But if we put in a bunch of chips and THEN he hits, that's a bonafide suckout.
WhatEVER. I'll now go stare at my email box hoping to find an invite.
Tommy
Tommy, do you think we hate money or something? Why would we want to ruin a perfectly good line-up (I'm up quite a bit on "Loo") by inviting a seasoned professional who spars with Ray Zee? Come on.
:)
natedogg
I already told you why. To use up the dusty beers in my fridge. :-)
Well, I don't drink, so you'll have to come up something more attractive than that!
natedogg
How about this. I smoke anything that burns and I've got extra. :-)
But why am I sucking up to you? I just got an e-vite from the man hisself!
Tommy
I'll make you a deal, I won't warn them about how you slap Ray Zee and Bobby Hoff around the NL table on a regular basis, if you'll agree to give me an honest evaluation of my play after the game is over.
natedogg
Now hold on just a second here!!! Did I EVER say anything about "slapping them around?" No way! I run from those guys!
I posted one hand here between me and Bobby in which he put me down to the green. Since then we've sparred at a few pots, but no real money has been exchanged. As to Ray Zee, we have yet to play a pot, and it's possible we never will. Some guys I just don't play against, and he's one of them.
I'm flattered by your evaluation request. Please know that I talk a better game than I play, that's for sure. The only reason I manage to scrape by is because I'm very good at the non-playing aspects: game selection, being rested, not playing too long, quitting with chips when stuck, leaving town or dropping down in limit when everything goes to crap, etc.
Basically, I'm tiltless. That's my game. In that state, strings of wins just materialize. It's dodging the disasters that makes all the difference.
Tommy
Lets kick the game up to 5-5-10 and I'll gamboolze it up with you guys :)
Shawn Keller
So I didn't have much of a hand there. I didn't think he had much of one either. Given that he called, he had *something*, which means that I sucked out on him. On the other hand, more of the money went in after I was ahead than before.
I think he has a pair here. He correctly puts you on overcards. It's not really a suck out, a lot of NL hold 'em boils down to two players: a pair against a draw.
He bets out $75. I am now totally sure I am ahead, and think, count chips, generally look lost, and eventually raise all in. He thinks and thinks, stares at me while I try to look nervous, and eventually calls with A7 for $250 more.
As a side note, as I'm about to turn my hand over, another player at the table says, "QQ. Totally obvious." This impressed me.
I my opinion, this type of acting will cost you a lot of money in the long run. If you take an extra 1 second to make the move, fine. But the dramatic stuff, or its absence, will have the good players reading you like a book.
Just a couple comments:
I LOVE your bet on the river with a four straight showing. I always think that's a great play. He's just as afraid of it as you are. However, if he raises, you HAVE to dump your hand, even if you only raises you 1/3 of the pot. There's very little chance he DOESN'T have the hand when he's raising you on the river in the face of a four straight (or four flush for that matter).
I may not have bet the full $200 (or so) pot for that very reason. I might have bet $100 which in fact would probably look more scary to him. You also don't want to expose yourself too deeply if he's got the straight. With a $100 bet, you make a nice pot if he pays you off with less and it's less painful to back off if he moves in on you.
Hand 2:
He played this hand wrong on every step. Sure he got a lucky flop but he even played that wrong. You, on the other hand, played it right all the way. You raised preflop, you bet into the flop when it was checked to you. Most importantly, you backed off when he smooth-called you in the face of an A on the flop. He obviously HAS an A. His weak-ass attempt at a slowplay cost him money, pure and simple.
nice play. Sounds like you did well.
natedogg
When I was learning HE, I found Caro's "12Days to HE Excellence" to be very helpful. Each "Day" you were to read a "lesson", and then go out with one specific mission.
I found this a very effective way to learn/get better. By focusing on one mission, you became more aware of the entire game. Also, once you learned one day's mission, it tended to become a permanent part of your arsenal.
I would be interested in knowing if the more experienced players would offer similar advice unique to PL/NL for those of us relatively new to PL/NL.
For example, in the chapter on PL in Ciaffone's "Omaha HoldEm Poker" on p.72, he talks about bet size in relation to the type of flop that falls, saying you should make a big bet when the board cannot have made a lock, and betting a smaller amount (whether you're stealing or not) into a 3 flush or pair flop, where you either have it or not. That could be a "mission", forcing you to pay specific attention to the texture of a flop, and learning the effects of a particular betting pattern.
Other "tactics" and how to identify the appropriate opportunity to use them that are unique to PL/NL are the type of "missions" that may improve one's game.
How 'bout it, Greg, or other NL experts? Can you think of any learning missions we could use?
I'm not an expert, but I can tell you that by far the most important thing you can do to improve your NL/PL game is to learn all you can about position.
Your first mission should be to watch the good players very closely in terms of how they play their position. Notice what they show down (which will be rare) from up front versus from behind.
Count how many times they win the pot when they have position versus when they don't.
Count how many times they win the pot without a showdown vs a showdown and the positions they were in.
There's more I'm sure. Basically, just observe everything the good players do in terms of position. That's what I do and I know for a fact I'm a much better no limit player now than I was six months ago. However, I have only just begun to understand position in NL play.
natedogg
I really really really did not want to show my hand. Bobby Hoff said I had to. What do you think?
On a midnight ramble to the $5-5-10, $20-to-go NL game, I decided in the car to experiment with Ray Zee's underbetting style. The game was soon short-handed, and held together for hours.
Many times I bet $40 to $80 on the flop, from last seat, into pots ranging from $100-$300. Several times my right-hand-opponent (RHO)(not Bobby) check-raised me and I folded. Two times I played back and he folded.
The stage was set for some unusual betting, because of the persistent underbetting. Then this hand came up.
I had 88, both red. I opened for $60 (standard) and RHO called from the BB. The flop came Q-J-x, two spades. He checked and I bet $40. He fumbled some, and raised $400. I saw it coming and called instantly using $100 chips. (We both had about 4K on the table.)
Turn came a small spade. He checked and I checked.
River came another small spade, putting a four flush on board. RHO bet out $600. I thought for a while and called. He said, "I missed." I said, "How bad?" He said, "Real bad," and mucked his hand.
Bobby said he wanted to see the winning hand. Understand that Bobby and I get along great and there's mutual respect, but I thought he was WAY wrong this time, and said so. "Why should RHO get free info on me when I do not get to see what he was betting with? If HE wants to see my hand, all he had to do is turn his over. Then it's a fair exchange of information."
Bobby said the winning hand must be shown if requested by one of the players, but the losing player cannot ask to see it. I agreed with that last part. I suggested we call the floorman and Bobby got all huffy (Hoffy? :-))
I deferred immediately because Bobby is older and wiser, and turned over my pocket eights. The floorman came over to see what the fuss was and we said never mind.
We were at short-handed war here, in a situation that was bound to come up repeatedly given my constant underbetting, and I really really really did not want to show my hand. Besides that, I truly don't think I should have to, just on a feeling of what is right and wrong about information at the table.
Comments on the rule? Comments on the play? Comments on the underbetting?
Tommy
The rule is that a called hand, which would include your winning hand, must be shown if requested. At Bellagio, this includes to the losing player after he has mucked, as I found out while playing there with a real jerk. All I can say about the play is good read, good call.
I thought it was a 10/10/20 $40 to go game. Has it decreased in blinds?
Doc,
You're right. The blinds are still 10-10-20, 40 to go. I must have been typing while having flashbacks to the Friday game at AJ's.
Tommy
No need to be modest amigo: Tommy's got a great article on this rule coming out next month.
Bobby Hoff is correct in that the RULE allows him to see the hand. What is grossly incorrect is that the rule exists. This rule is never invoked except to gain extra information or to annoy, even though it's real intention is to help protect against collusion (which it does not).
Tommy, I still think the best reason for eliminating this rule is that it only serves to get players mad. Nothing good comes of it and no purpose is served, so it should be eliminated. And, there's absolutely no reason why an individual casino couldn't take the first step, because THERE IS NO RISK TO THE CASINO in eliminating this rule.
Matt,
Thanks for the support, but this situation was significantly different than the typical situation in which the "I want to see that hand rule" is abused. First, the game was no-limit, where everything is amplified, and I was (about to be) forced to reveal critical information.
Second and more important, in a limit setting, if the first player bets, and the second one calls, and then the first player mucks, there is no winning hand face up on the table and still the pot is being awarded. For someone to want to see the WINNING hand, well, I have no logical argument against it, only an emotional one.
In the usual abuse of I-want-to-see-that-hand, the winning hand is face up, and it is LOSING hands that are forced to be shown. Big difference.
Tommy
True, it seems more reasonable to ask to see the winning hand than a losing one. Nevertheless, what value is added to the game by allowing it? You made a killer call, the guy burned his cards, so it's yours. Why should you be punished for it? Your opponent obviously doesn't want to show. Bobby Hoff in your position wouldn't want to show. So if nobody wants to show and showing has no bearing on the outcome of the hand, why not just get rid of the requirement?
In the $25-$25 pot limit HE game at the WSOP last year. It was a pretty strange hand that occured just after I sat down. It was th first pot I played.
A young, rich kid limped UTG and the tough regular to his left raised it to $150. A couple more unknown guys in middle position cold call the raise, so I also call from one off the button with AsKs. Bobby calls on the button directly to my left. The big blind also comes along, and we have the makings of a monster pot.
Now the young kid under the gun looks around, springs to life and reraises it to an even grand. The original raiser folds as do the other two middle positionguys. After the original raiser folded and as the other two guys were deciding, I was icing down the kid. I am certain he DOES NOT want a call, so he can't have Aces or Kings. The only guy he should fear if he has KK is the original raiser. He shouldn't fear anyone if he has AA, but fear he does.
I decide to put him to the test and take advantage of all that dead money. I move in for the rest of my chips, making it about $4000 total. I know Bobby and the BB (who have me covered easily) ain't calling.
They fold as planned and now the kid looks like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. I think he must have read about the old limp-reraise power move and can't believe someone now moved in on him. Amazingly, he folds!
As I am raking in nearly 2 grand profit uncontested, Bobby starts grumbling about "calling the floor for an inquiry."
I say "Bobby, if you had my cards, you would have done the same thing. As to what that guy had, I am as baffled as you are."
umm, i have a problem, i like to play a lot of NO LIMIT UGGGGHHHHHHH BOUT IT BOUT IT, and when I nutty, i am afraid to show offf my nuts especially to those female players who cant ever flop the nuts, cause they dont got em. I mean for example, I was holdin 2 whites in 4th position, and the flop came white, black, black. Full house nutty right off the nuts. I mean talk about an unimagineable flop mean! and then, there was afemal flopper at my right, so I couldnt expose the nuts when It was time to show us ya nuts.....what can I do??
-Ghetto mean
whan did the morons start to post????
what you have to do ghetto mean here is show the nuts to everyone, but only if they are whites, you basically have to just pull em out and flop them for everyone to see. if you flop a full boat you have to be proud of your huge nuts and raise them and re raise them, even for the broads to see, show them the nutties.
leon chochy
i dissagree with leon, in this situation you first need to evaluate your color, if you are playin high low split nut, and you get the double nuts, and you are a non white you may need to change your color in order to flop the nuts for everyone to see
In the lengthy post about god knows what and all that incoherent babble i have come to the conclusion that you are a piece of shit and for what every purpose the post was for(humor, help, anecdotal etc) it obviously did not succeed to meet any expectation of a rational, or intelligent idea that people on this board expect and demand.
People like you not only should not be able to post, but youre existence is irrelevant also
DIE
Wow, I would hate to crack that guys' Aces with 2-7 off. He may come across the table and bite me or something.
Small PL game (1-2 blinds). Buy-ins are around $100. I currently have about $250 in front of me.
Game is 5 handed and everyone limps in before the flop. I have 8h5h and check in the BB.
Flop comes 6h7s10h. It gives me an open ended straight draw. I check, UTG raises the pot for $20. One folds, cutoff colds calls $20. Button and SB fold. I check-raise the pot for $50. Both UTG and button calls. Pot now stands are $160 or so.
Question: Good check-raise semi-bluff?
Turn comes a Jclubs. I bet out the pot for $160.
Question: Overaggressive?
Basically, I put both UTG and Cutoff on a draw and if they had top pair they would be forced to fold given I was in BB and had anything.
Results to come later.
The Fish.
Bad play. Raising with the flush draw is a move that is WAY over-used in NL/PL games. It's usually pretty obvious to spot. You had a straight draw too but your flush draw gave it away.
In addition, you made the HORRENDOUS mistake of making this move from out of position. This move only has a chance to work if you have position. Without position, you are guessing big-time on the turn, which is what happened here with you.
I personally have come to despise the raise-with-a-flush-draw move. It's a terrible, losing play and all good players will read you for it easily and punish you mightily. I think it's one of the weakest beginner moves in NL that there is.
Just to be fair, I've used it a few times myself. I have drawn out with the flush once, and lost several times. I've NEVER had anyone fold so much as top pair-weak kicker with this move.
natedogg
I am starting to play PLO this coming week. I have ordered a few books on the subject and have been reading in this forum. Furthermore, I have played Limit Omaha.
When I play Omaha I generally play very tight (possibly too tight). I am hoping this will be the right approach in the pot limit style. I like all four cards to be related to one another pre-flop. Post-Flop i either have the nuts and am trying to win it right there or, I have a draw to the nuts and, am trying to get there as cheap as possible. I have found that when I try to protect my hand it gets real expensive. Will the Pot Limit element help or hinder with this? Furthermore, if one flops the nuts with no redraws, is it worth trying to protect? Lastly, do I need more than 20 outs to continue with most draws in this game?
If I am off base or asking the wrong questions please let me know. Any input that you have would certainly be appreciated.
Eric
$45 buy in tourney; early stages. People are limping in a lot. Blinds are 25-50; everybody's stack is about 1000. I am on the button. Two people limp in front of me; I look down and see AQo. I can't think of a flop I will really like with this deep money, so I fold.
Comments?
William
I think a raise of $200-300 is called for here. AQo is a decent starting hand and you would like to limit the field and/or get the limpers to fold and steal the pot. And if you do get a couple of callers, they will probably bail on the flop if you bet out. Of course this advice would be wrong if many people were seeing the flop regardless of pre-flop raises. Then I would just call.
I also understand you are out of position but that makes it easier to steal on the flop. Usually if it is short handed the first person to bet the flop takes it down. Also I can only think of six hands better than AQo (AA KK QQ AKs AKo and AQs). My opinion is, folding here is wrong. But, I'll let others elaborate.
nt
I was not involved in this particular hand.
Small Blind and Big Blind are both new to the game (BB is in hand #1, and SB is in hand #2). They both moved from the 150/300 (or was it 300/600 - I don't know for sure) Omaha game which became short. Everyone folds to the button - who is an aggressive player (will only stop aggression when raised or bet into), maybe slightly loose (played A6o in cutoff with 4 limpers, not that bad for loose players, but still fairly loose). The button raises. The SB makes it 3 bets. The BB calls. The button caps it. SB & BB both call.
The flop comes 743 - all diamonds.
SB checks, BB checks, button bets, SB calls, BB raises, button 3 bets....SB now folds, BB 4 bets, button calls.
the turn is a Kc.
BB bets, button calls.
river is a 8s
BB bets, button calls.
BB turns over KdKs
I found the flat call preflop somewhat interesting. Is it best to four bet it here (Bellagio - where 5 bets is cap, I believe), or just to smooth call and then checkraise on the flop if an A does not hit?
I'm going to come down on the wishy-washy side here.
It's important to mix up your play, but it's also important to balance your play. I would tend to reraise here, since there are very few hands that I would play where I didn't think I was best. I like to reraise from the BB short handed, so I need to do it with my top hands to provide cover for the hands where I don't have something quite as good.
Having said that, if the player will call with other hands, or only would raise with AA, KK or QQ or some such set, then calling for deception is probably a good idea.
*shrug*
It's probably fine either way. This is one of those decisions that is not likely to make or lose much money either way.
The 4-bet on the flop is gutsy, btw. Must've had a good read on the player to have so little fear of the flush.
Actually i came from a 30-60 game . I know the other player from that limit. He would 3 or 4 bet almost every Ace on the button and i almost allways let him do the action preflop in this situations. I also held the Kd in that hand what helped me a little bit and my bet on the river was because he would call even with as little as a pair deuces. However it,s allways somewhat risky but i have good experience playing this way ..even i'm not fam. with that limit... but he isn't also! at the smaler limit he would sometimes even raise at the river as a pure bluff
I would just like to know how are the very big game in vegas ' casinoz . I mean 400-800 or 1000-2000 . Is there any fishes there who think they could make a bluff every hands because they are drinking a 8th beer and wear a cowboy hat on the head ?Is there ring game of that ? 10 players at the table ?
I am from zee province of Nova Scotia, eh?, and I Like to go to Laz Vagus and play high limit, no? I wear my 10 gallon stetson hat, and after having put ze bizkit in se basket on ze pond so many times, I like to play a leetle 40000-80000 wit' ze great Doyle et al. Mee zee feeshy, parley vous? No no. Maybe in ze holdum, but watch out for me in ze dealer's choice. I am as graceful as Guy Lafleur and I sting like Gordie Howe in ze chowaha round. Dee 8nd beer, seer? It takes a case of Molson Golden for ze blood to flow. By zee way, if you touch my Golden or my cowboy hat, I will beat you to dath with my Sherwood PMP 9950, it eez stiff flex, and zee Gretzky model, eh? Go Habs!!!
nt
Don't mind him JP, he's playing with you...
I'm sure he's single and lonely...
Nicolas Fradet (ThePrince)
nt
what the hell does F-CC have to do with your snoring problem?
I dono , I just wanted to have a rational answer to initila question ...but , anyway...
I posted some questions on the "General" board about Archie Karras. If anyone knows some gossip about him, please post it there.
Doug
WELL I KNOW THAT HE PLAYD FOOTBALL AND THEN ADOPTED A MIDGIT NAMED GARY COLEMAN, I THINK MAYBE HE HAD SOME HOMOSEXES OR TAX FRAUD IN HIS PAST BUT OTHERWEISE I DONT KNOW ANY DIRT ON HIM
met tommy angelo and mat over the week-end. good guys all. They convinced me to try the 2-3-5 no limit game at artichoke's on Sunday night. I am a fish. anyways, here are two A-K hands that I'd like comments on.
1. I'm in the cut-off with A-K. agressive player opens for 25, fold to me, I raise 25, everyone else folds. there is is $110 in the pot. flop comes A-8-3 all clubs. I do not have a club. Agressive player checks to me. I think for a minute and bet $200. agressive player calls. Turn is an offsuit rag. we both check. river is an 8. we both check and agressive player turns over K-4 of clubs for the nut flush. comments?
2. I'm in the big blind with again with A-K. everyone folds to the small blind (SB), so far a passive player, who bets $20. I raise $20 and he calls. the flop comes J-rag-rag. SB checks and I check. the turn is a K. Now Sb bets $60. I call. the river is another rag. SB bets $100 and I call. SB turns over K-J. I hated calling both bets on the turn and river. especially the river since I'm pretty sure he would not bet into me if he couldn't beat AA or AK, but what do I know?
all comments appreciated.
Hey Boris. I almost went to the game last night, maybe next time!
Anyway..
Hand 1: Nothing you can do here except bet less on the flop. This is one of those hands where you are either facing a draw or a made hand, no two ways about it. So bet the pot. If you are facing a made hand, you're going to get raised (normally). So bet about 80-100 because if you overbet the pot like that with 200, you should either have a monster hand (hoping for a second-best monster to come with you) or be VERY confident that you can push off a made hand with a big bet. Obviously, you had no chance of scaring off the nuts.
If you bet $100, the same thing would probably have happened, but you would have saved $100. He wanted to trap you on the turn but you checked and the board paired on the river scaring him into checking. With a $100 bet you save $100. With $100 bet, you can get away from it if he goes all-in on you right away. What you DON'T want to do in NL is to put so much money into a small pot to protect your strong hand that you get trapped for the rest when you run into the nuts.
Hand 2: Call or raise the turn, fold on the river. This person is betting into you from out of position after you called a turn bet when the scare card arrived. They can beat your hand.
Overall, I think even the best of players would have lost only about $200 less than you did on these hands. I think an expert would have bet less on the first hand but likely would have raised a bit on the turn with the second hand. However, I'm no expert. Yet. :)
natedogg
I think you did fine on the second hand. There are TONS of hands he could have bet that way that you could beat.
The first hand, well, I think your $200 bet was a scared bet. Let's ignore his actual hand for a moment.
It's okay to let a guy draw at the flush for a pot-sized bet, or even less, IF you can avoid paying off, because then his implied odds are ZERO. And with a three-flush already on board, it's easier to not pay off, so your overbet in this spot didn't even serve the typical fear-reducing purpose of "I hope he folds instead of hitting some hand on the turn that I'm afraid I won't be able to read."
Let's say you had bet $100. If he calls with a draw, he is getting 2-1 pot odds. Typically when we go for draws even though the current money is not right, we hope or expect to gain some chips later in the hand after we hit. But if he hits on the turn and we don't pay, his retroactive odds were insufficient. We win theoretical money.
Because he called such a big bet on the flop, you were able to play great from there and check it down. Super play. The "usual" scenario is a pot-sized (or smaller)bet on the flop, and then if it looks like you're still good on the turn, another pot-sized bet (or more) gives him woeful drawing odds with one card to go. Many of the fine players around here don't panic on the flop with position. Controlling the pot size early gives you more options later in the hand.
Tommy
well maybe I'll see you there next week natedogg. I'm not sure though. its hard to forsake playing limit, where I feel confident in my play, to play no-limit where I'm not nearly as sure of myself.
couple things I need to work on is taking more time to decide how much to bet. I generally make a quick decision when playing limit about whether to fold, call or raise. a couple times I would pick up a stack and start my betting motion without a decision about how much to bet. I made two mistakes that were plainly obvious moments later and that I could have avoided had I taken a minute to think. In one case I did not bet enough so I failed to get full value for my hand and in another case (against tommy in fact) I raised when I should have just called.
I also had a somewhat frustrating night in that I was able to steal the blinds alot and also steal many small pots. but three times I came out on the losing end of a big pot and twice, when I had a very strong hand there was no one home to pay me off despite my attempts at a trap. such is poker. I also limped in one time with about six other people and flopped a monster draw. unfortunately this one kid goes all in (again) and I had to muck.
Hey Boris,
Good playing with you last night! You had much tougher hands to play than I did. I'm no no-limit player, but I definitely like the fact that your flop bet prevented a river bet from a guy with a great hand. Sure you coulda saved a few $$ up front, but you will the next time and you surely saved many on the back end of that hand. So good for you!
I also liked that you called but did not raise on the turn in the second hand. He only calls your raise if you're beat. He knows you would've bet AA, KK, QQ, KJ, or AJ on the flop. You may have slow-played JJ, but then he achieves the same amount from you if you raise then check the river. So where's the upside to raising? Nice decision.
I think I recall both the hands you cited. I was seated to your immediate left.
1. When the aggresive guy called the flop bet, you knew you were beat. With AK, consider raising maybe $75-80 BTF to isolate and see if he will lay down without a flop.
2. The passive guy was to your immediate right. I had played him before. In fact, I made a mental note to drop anytime he took the lead and I was holding a marginal hand. He got lucky on the flop hitting the jack. But like the first example, raise more and maybe you can win without a flop.
In both cases, you have position on your opponents with AK and a better starting hand.
The aggresive guy seemed to do pretty well. However, he also caught a lot of breaks. I remember once he had AK against KK and flopped an ace. He seemed to hit with AK an inordinate amount of times. If he plays next Sunday, I'm curious to see how he does.
I left at 1030PM with about a $100 profit. My head cold was starting to hurt. Else, I would have continued on. Maybe I'll see you next Sunday.
One other thing, if you play a lot of limit, it might be good to start with the tourney. The one thing I benefit from is it allows me to get in a no-limit frame of mind before the side game. The payout is awful, so you are likely to lose $49 or $89. But, the side game does seem easier after playing the tourney.
Hi TR, I remember who you are. hope to see you again.
couple comments, the game was so passive that my AK raises were generally for value in the hopes that someone would call. unfortunately I ran into a couple freight trains on the flop. maybe I should be happy with picking up the blinds and a bet.
Unless something interferes, I will be at AJ Sunday night.
Your right, the game was reletively tame. You did catch a couple of bad breaks on your two AK hands. cases. There is always a next time.
Coming to Vegas in early April. Is the only NL game in town at the Stratosphere? If so, what are the blinds and the typical chip counts of the players.
This is my first trip up there and Daddy Warbucks is fitting the bill. I'll have a couple grand to just blow to you guys. Where should I spread the wealth?
If the WSOP has started, try Binions. The will have pl for sure from 2-5 up to 25-50 and higher. Probably no limit, too. I also heard that the Las Vegas Club is looking to get a smaller big bet game going.
But that is it as far as I know. Las Vegas is not no limit or pot limit territory.
Hell, its barely poker territory outside of the Bellagio.
I also heard that the Las Vegas Club is looking to get a smaller big bet game going.
I didn't know the Las Vegas Club had any poker.
Fat-Charlie
Razzo on rgp says they recently opened a small room and are in full promotion mode. Never been there myself.
The blinds are $1 and $2. I think you will have a good time there. Win or lose,no-limit is a lot of fun. The average chip count,whenever I have played there, is arond $200,some with more,some with less. Nothing like the small blind no-limit games of a couple of years ago at Texas Station (the money was very,very,deep in that game).
As far as small blind no-limit in Las Vegas.In my six years living in Las Vegas, Dispite what some might tell you, I have had no trouble finding a game. Even before the Strat started spreading it. As Mason likes to say,these games often burn themselves out after awhile. It has been my experience though,that there is alwys a new place that starts spreading it after it has died out somewhere else.
There are also places that sometimes will spread it unadvertised. The Santa Fe (before they closed their cardroom) used to spread it on graveyard a lot,and that was a really nice game. No one ever heard of it,because you had to be in the room really to even know about it. I also have played in a few rooms where some people have asked for a vote and everyone voted to play no-limit. When this happens,the game is almost always good,as you seem to have a lot of gamblers trying to get even for the night.
If you decide to play at the Strat,be sure to put a post up telling when you will be playing, for it's always nice to meet 2+2ers in person.
Good Luck
Howard
NL at the Stratosphere (Stupak's Shaft) is great. The stack sizes will be anywhere from $50-500. The buy in is $50. Blinds are 1-2. Great game and also a safe game if you are learning N/L. Often contains 2 or more tourists/very poor players. It also has some really good players. The N/L tourney there is good too. There is a older heavy set woman there that wears glasses. She pretends to know nothing about poker, yet she plays in the tourney every time they have it. She is very very funny to watch. She really isn't that good of a player. She loves to act weak when strong...and ask 'How much can I bet?' You will know her when you see her. You also get a neat little trophy to take home with you if you win it. $33.00 buy in. Have a great time!
If you are on a budget, you might want to check out the top ten eating and gambling values at:
http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/greatdeals-Weboffers.cfm
and
http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/topten.cfm
My nuts, when I flop my white nuts on the table, are seriously kind of salty. I always have to get some fish to lick 'em a little and see how they are. I think my nuts are big and beautiful and when played right, will vibrate a chord deep inside even the most aggressive maniac's little nervecenter. I like my nuts. Maybe someday, you'll get to lick them too.
Well, this is my first post to 2+2. I feel initiated now, along with the other morons besides myself. Future posts will be directed to serious matters.
I think Doyle is a great player. You gotta have nerve to play for big money. You have to be able to go all in with any two cards. I play no limit hold 'em with a small ante (big and small blinds.) Bluffing is by far the most important aspect of no limit. You have to know when to bluff, and how big. You have to be able to bluff rags against a King-high flush. Just think of the psychological value of such a hand. Because that, my friends, is a hand you want him to see for free. You throw those down without a word and rake the pot.
No Limit you're playing people. Betting isn't as important (such as saving an additional bet) as in limit. No limit is such a psychological game. The better you can read and know your opponents the better you do. Whereas in limit you just have to make the right plays. Even if you get burnt on a hand, you call a raise on the river to see how your two pair hold up, you're only getting burnt on one bet (assuming the bet and every other play up to that point was correct.)
In no limit deception is key. Always keep them guessing. Look stressed when you have the absolute nuts. Don't just go all in. Sit and outwardly wrestle with the decision. Act just as strong on a bluff as a good hand. Start pulling reverse reactions (good hand = meek, bad hand = strong) then reverse it. Then start doing certain facial expressions in the top half of the hour and others in the lower.
And NEVER go on tilt EVER. You can be down $5k out of $7k and still don't give an inch, play like you've been winning all night. If the game gets to you, then no limit might not be your game. I read a lot of passages on how reading people and hands is an art and a science and how hard it is to put into words, and that's because it's just something that takes innate talent. You either wonder what he has, or you damn near know what he has, anything in between is guessing. And for people like Mason Malmuth to take shots at No Limit, when it is based on one of the most difficult skills in the game, is absurd. I say play no limit. Don't grind it out. No limit is exciting and very very satisfying when played well.
You misconstrue my comments. I have always said that no limit was a game of great skill. It's just that I thnk that limit has even more skill.
I've seen this debate over which game has more skill in a couple of places. It's amusing, no? Limit and No Limit both require great skill to master. You can't quantify the skills of either, really. It's like asking which takes more skill, trumpet or clarinet. You need enormous skill to be a virtuouso at either.
Which takes more skill, writing a great poem or a great short story? cooking a gourmet meal or knitting a scarf? balancing on one foot or dancing the polka......
Ashley
.. for your perspective. I agree as well that this ongoing "debate" could use a nice long rest.
Ive spent some time trying to learn and to play both big bet and limit well. they are both very hard, best bet is to look for a soft game in either direction. i think they are about equal in skill, but the best skill is to find the game that has unskillfull players whether its big bet or limit. thats my skll.
This may be a dumb question, but how come you see many top players who win no-limit tournaments also place in limit tournaments, yet many limit regulars don't fare very well in NL play?
I tend to agree with Colonel. While the debate itself isn't really my objective here, it's to turn people on to no limit because it seems like no limit is damn near dead on this forum. No limit is one of the most exciting games you can ever play. Some people can't play it all the time because of the staggering variance it usually has, but it's definitely a rush.
But if we are to look at the best players in the country, would we be looking at the professors on this forum? Or some of the people that consistently place in the no limit tournaments? Well, it just depends on who you look up to. The Sklansky-Rosenbloom Match should be proof enough that they are two different games. That much is obvious (to respond to Mason Malmuth's statement.) But it seems like this forum doesn't give the no limit game or it's players their due credit.
No limit is exciting and very very satisfying when played well.
Isn't this the best argument for NOT playing NL?
In another of your posts you use the word 'rush' to describe the effect of the game.
If playing NL engenders such a physiological/emotional reaction, then it would seem that one's ability to play in this higher stress and higher variance game would be compromised.
Oops. I just realized that you are trying to entice these losers into your game. Sorry.
Eric
I have am trying to decide what the best play is when I flop Top set in PLO when it is the current nuts. I have been routinely check-raising the flop with a pot-sized bet even if the board looks dangerous (example to follow). The game I play in is quite loose, and thus if I am in early position a check raise is usually available. Lately I have been getting killed by drawing hands and have backed off coming over the top on the flop with top set when the board is co-ordinated. I have been waiting until a safe card hits on the turn before committing myself and thus the drawing hands are now not getting the right price to call. Am I am being too cautious here? I know this is definitely the safer route. Here is an example from the other night.
PLO 10,25,50 blind.
I have QdQcKc5c and 2800 in chips in the early position and limp in for 50. We take the flop 7 handed, which comes Qh10h7s, while I love flopping top set, the board is still very dangerous because of the possible draws. I check to Player A (VERY solid) who bets 350. All muck to button Player B (bit of a loose cannon but no idiot) who smooth calls the 350 quick. The action is back on me and I, as I routinely do, check raise making it 1600 to go. Player A ponders forever and mucks, and Player B immediately tells me to put the rest in. I positive I am up against a wrap and a flush draw. I call and the turn is the card of death for me, the 8h ... The river is a blank and Player B turns over Jh9h8c7d to take the pot with the straight flush. As it turns out the initial bettor, Player A, had the case Q with the nut flush draw.
This kind of hand routinely comes up where you flop top set and it is the current nuts, but the board is open to multiple draws and you have little in the way of other draws in your hand. Should this kind of hand just be smooth called on the flop when out of position against multiple players in hopes of putting the pressure on if a blank or pair comes on the turn?
Any comments would be appreciated.
Derek
How can your check raise be wrong? You are making it as expensive as possible for him to make his draw while you are in the lead. True, you got drawn out on, but isn't that the point of the check raise..to minimize the chances of this happening.
I admit to being relatively inexperienced at PL (though I'm reading and playing a lot lately). Oh experienced players, what am I missing?
Against a really big draw you may not even be a favorite with the current nuts. Putting the money in when you are a clear favorite is sometimes a better idea.
The way I see it, for the next card, 27 take the best hand away from you, and 18 keep you in the lead. Making you an underdog if all the draws are out.
However, you can expect there to be all the draws out there that are possible. So let's assume that your opponent has what you think, flush and open and down draw. This drastically improves your chances as only 15 to 16 cards kill you depending on which draw he has and 29 or 30 keep you in the lead.
Best case scenario puts you as a 2 to 1 favorite to win. However, there are 2 cards to come, drastically reducing your chances and giving the draw the edge.
If you add one card to your opponents hand giving him KJ9, or J98, you now have 23 that keep you in the lead and 22 that knock you out. With two cards to come, I don't like these odds.
I wouldn't fold, but I wouldn't be jammin' the pot either, especially with 2 opponents. I would call, take another card, and with the size of the pot, put in as much as you can on the turn if you still have the lead. If you lose the lead, do whatever you can to get that river card as cheaply as possible.
With two cards to come you are a dog on the flop. I suggest you read Bob Ciaffone's book. I would slow down on the flop and if a blank comes on the turn pound the pot with only one card to come when you become a big favorite.
Bruce
I think I should have been a little clearer in my post and I think I used a bad example.
I fully understand the concept that I can flop top set with no flush or straight possible and be a sizable Dog to win the hand against a big draw. That is not the issue I was aiming at.
I have watched weak players who won't make a move with top set with a semi-dangerous board until they are SURE that no one else has made a bigger hand. They usually play very defensive poker until the river. These types of players are willing to CALL large bets when they flop top set with a board open to multiple draws, but rarely put any pressure on the drawing hands. These players never seem to capitalize on their big hands.
The example I used was a bad one as I was clearly a dog heads up against Player B's hand. I would have made the same move he did on the flop. A better example would have been my having top set and my opponent having a openended straight draw and a flush draw (eg: JhJc6d6c vs. KsQs4d5d flop Js10s2c) In this example I am a favorite to win the hand but my opponent still has a big draw, one with which he would probably commit all of his chips given the chance. A low variance approach to a hand like this is to play the flop defensively with hopes of a blank hitting on fourth street before applying any pressure.
I don't think you can play every flopped set as if you are upgainst "the mother of all draws" every hand.
Derek
It depends on the money depth.
If the money is short, go all-in with your top set and you will have the best of it generally.
If the money is very deep, bet full pot on the flop planning to only call to a raise, and then to bet full pot on the turn if a blank comes, or to check/fold check/call if a scared card comes depending on implied odds (draw to full house) and other considerations (opponent profile, is he bluffing, ...)
Now the most difficult to play is with medium stacks: play defensively if you want to minimize your variance(in a freeze out tournament, or when you are losing); play offensively if you want to maximize your EV (when you are winning, in the rebuy period of a tournament)
I agree with ohnonotagain's analysis. In this case especially, you could get all but $600 in with your raise. And the point I want to make is that you are in front. So you have to act first next card off, a big disadvantage. If you're last for instance, you can bet into a straightened board (in this example when an ace hits on the turn)because no one can afford to check the nut straight. So I would tend to wait to raise with in position hands. Another key point missed in all this discussion is that you need to release your hand to start with. This kind of hand doesn't play well from in front.
Another tendency of mine would be to wait to raise when there are few draws out and lots of cards that are neutral. In this situation, there are only 12 neutral cards (non heart dueces, threes, fours and fives).
You are right - you cannot always assume that your opponent has the biggest possible draw. Sometimes you will be a favourite, sometimes he will be, and sometimes it will be about even.
On occasion, however, your opponent may be betting or raising with second set, when your hand will be huge. How often this happens depends on the game, the player, and you image.
Another VERY important consideration in this kind of situation is that if you have obvious top set and the board pairs on 4th street - about 16% of the time - WITHOUT all the money being in, your opponent with a big draw will be able to realise he is drawing dead and to escape without losing it all. This is a big reason why the top set should be more inclined to put all the money in, and the big draw should not. In your original example, the player with the big draw may well have made a mistake putting the rest of the money in.
Additionally, the drawing player usually deprives himself of bluffing opportunities if he goes all in on the flop. In your example, as it so happens, an ace would NOT have made a straight for your opponent, but you did not know this, and I would have said that had there still been a reasonable amount of money to bet, you would have had to think that an ace DID make him a straight. So again, maybe he should not have gone all in on the flop.
Overall, I think you will rarely find that you have made a big mistake going all in on the flop in this situation, provided you can stand the big swings which it will involve, whereas not doing so can be a big mistake, or permit you to be bluffed out on a later street.
Finally, note that the drawing hand will occasionally fin himself in much worse shape than he thinks - what if you had had AKQQ with the nut flush draw in your example - you would have been a huge favourite. If you routinely get it all in on the flop, your drawing opponents will never know when this might happent to them.
Oh no!! Not again!
best situation would have been if both had called giving you odds to try to fill. id hate to burn up a bunch of money on the flop and dog it on the turn. i think the check raise is fine. if you hadnt been raised all in you would have odds to draw the river for the rest of your stack.
hi. sup. I recently was at the bellagio and they were trialing this new game called color poker. First off, they seat you at the table by color, me being indian, in last position......anyways, they deal the flop first, then you get your hole cards.....which are colored......I peak down at my 2 hole nice's and see martin luther king and malcolm x. i was kind of excited.....the flop was master p, samuel L. jackson and chris rock! flushy nut martin luther king high! i had the nutty! anyways, the last 2 cards were 2 shitty white guys.....eminem and abraham lincoln.....so, some other guy had the negro flush but only the second nut, Cuba gooding jr., so, anyways, has anyone played this color poker game?? let me know! peace nut!
-paul white
Did the white guys pair the board, or was your king-high flush still the nutty?
o.k. when u flopped this mlk high flush of all flush nices...were u thinking about flopping the nuts..the twins. did u want to put them on the table. if so did the other white smart dumbs at the table compare your nuts to their nuts...and if so ...was your nuts more plentiful than there low hanging nuts...when i think about color nut poker...i remember back to when i flopped the nut white straight and some huge black nnnnnn punched me in the nuts..no literally...he hit my nuts...got eminem right in the face. If i had had abe lincoln in the whole my nuts would have been gigantic for a whites. but i had to settle with the rodney dangerfield high. weak riiiiiight?
It doesn't matter how much you raise with the Rodney Dangerfield high; no one respects your raise.
I'm in late position w/ AdKsKdTd. 5-10 PLO. We've only played a few hands and I'm at 1300. Everyone else (except the button) is at about 1000.
2 Limpers, then I raise to 50 on the cutoff. Button calls, 1st limper folds then 2nd Limper(L) re-raises another 100. I call as does the button. Flop comes Kh-4c-2c. L bets the pot. I raise all in. Button folds L calls and turns over Ac3c3s5c and catches a club on the turn w/ no board pair to save me.
Comments?
How can the guy limp-reraise with such a cheese hand and catch such a perfect flop to double through you? Even so, he wasn't that big a favorite, and I can only think of one better flop for him (33K). Heck, I could give him credit for AA3, AA5, even AA35 with clubs, but to have it all without AA is surprising.
He got lucky, or you got cold-decked. Bummer.
However, you might have played it different, and this way might have been better. It is pretty easy to give the guy credit for AA with clubs on that flop. If so, he has 10 outs. If he has AA3x or AA5x, he has 13 outs. Either way, he wins pretty often if you go all-in now. What if you just call the flop? If so, and he catches a scare card on the turn, you can maybe make the good laydown (or catch a bluff if you know him well). In any event, this play gives you a chance to make another decision, and if you make good decisions, it is likely the better play. If you are too likely to make mistakes on the turn (folding or calling when you should do the opposite), then by all means put it all in now.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Greg - I do like your idea of waiting till the turn to put it all in if the right card comes, but I have a couple of problems with it in this situation. I didn't think I'd want the button calling for 3-1 odds w/ some low straight draw if L were on AA-clubs.
Also, Since the pot is 450 on the flop and he makes the pot 900, my call makes it 1350 at which point, when he bets the pot on the turn , I am looking at 2000 to 600 on my call which is good odds to call for my 10 outer full house draw. If I'm going to have call anyway given that I don't have a full size bet, I figured I might as well get it in on the flop. If I have enough money where I'm not going to call regardless of the turn card if he puts me all in on the turn, I do like your play.
Do they still have the no limit tourney at the Mirage on Tuesdays? I hear the Mirage has really gone down hill.
I can't answer you on this but maybe you'll get more responses in the tourney forum...
See you there,
Nicolas Fradet (ThePrince)
How much $ should I take to a 1-2 pot limit game?
I would like to have at least $200 on the table at all times as you would be surprised at how quickly a pot can build.
Bring $600 if you got it and I wouldn't even go if you didn't have $200 to put in play.
Buy in for $100. Rebuy or replenish up to $200 if you lose a few pots and leave the $300 in your pocket to rebuy if you catch some bad breaks and the game is good.
Is this game starting again at the Baccarat?
No, I am going to visit a friend in Calgary who says the game there is very soft.
Baccarat gets too greedy with their mid to high limit games and tries to have them going every night of the week, until 75% of the players bust out and the game dies.
None unless you know what you are doing.
Andy.
the way i do pot limit is this. if its hold em i want to be able to call a raise and put in 5 percent of my stack. so if its 10 to go in a raised pot i need 200 in front of me at all times. ie. call the raise, muck the hand, ill put another 10 out of my pocket onto my stack. or burn up 60 on the hand, replentish out of my pocket. that is so when you do go all in youll be able to get some value and make up for the times you just call the raise and muck the hand.. at omaha i also like the 5 percent deal but ill go with 10 percent of my stack if i have to- ie in a game thats big enough that im not financed well enough to go with 5 percent. so if its a 200 by in with this criteria i would suggest at least 6 by ins. 1200. (1,2 blind- 10 to go game)
Isn't there only one way to find out if I know what I am doing? I'm not a pro, my rent money doesn't depend on poker winnings, so while I'm not looking to lose, if it happens, I can stand it (yeah yeah, everyone can throw in their comment "Where is your game and how do I get in it?" now). I like to imagine I can play ok if focussed enough.
I have just never watched a 1-2 pot limit game and don't know how big the pots get, so was looking for a bit of help in deciding how much to bring to the table. Thanks anyways.
Fair enough. Depending on your location though you might be able to find a cheap pot-limit tournament or two which would be a good practice ground.
I wouldn't generally advise people to jump into PL games unless they've done some thinking and studying first though.
Andy.
I play in all the no limit tourneys they have in town, the pokerpages tournaments, and I have read Cloutier's book, but thats it. There are no pot limit tournaments around here..
I have just never watched a 1-2 pot limit game and don't know how big the pots get, so was looking for a bit of help in deciding how much to bring to the table.
I've see 1 2 PL games with 10,000 on the table and 3000 pots. That would be an exceptionally good game. Michael 7's post seems on the mark as to what to bring.
I play regularly in a couple of pot limit games with $1,2 blind structures.
A lot depends on the nature of the game. THe size of the pots depends a lot on the buy ins. Are buy ins limited? If you're limited to a $100 buy in, then $500 is probably enough of a stake for a decent night of action. On the other hand, if nearly everyone buys in for $1,000, you'd be well served to go with at least $2,000.
My game is pot limit, $1,2 blinds, $100 buy in and rebuys whenever you're under $100. I don't think anyone lost as much as $1,000 the five or six times I've called the game. Another game is a similar structure but with a $200 buy in. The players are more aggressive. Some lose $1200-1500.
Ashley
im bout it bout it! ya, you bout it bout it? the No limit soldiers are bout it bout it? they bout the no limit sup
With just a little tweaking, the previous post can be sung to the tune of Battle Hymn of the Republic.
I'm about it bout it You about it bout too? The no-limit soldier bout it bout it they about the soup
Tommy
No limit rappers suck, they can't rap and they are fake. Except C-Murder he's a real G. But Master P is a sell out. C-Bo is gonna kill his ass.
This was my first trip into this part of 2+2 and I was very surprised to see all these posts. I'll try to clarify some of those remarks.I never said S/S was outdated. The fundamentals are the same and will always be the same. As many of the posters pointed out, the blinds structure has changed and you DO have to adjust your play. But, if I remember correctly, [its been 1/4 of a century]I said that the ante determines how you play. Also, how many players are in the game, and who they are determines how you play. So, even in "the old days" you had to adjust your play. Next, everybody wrote their own chapter, even though Alan Goldberg interpreted some of the collaborators thoughts into more understandable language. Also, Mike Caro helped Joey Hawthorne immensely with the lowball section, because Joey wasn't very dependendable.I wrote ALL of the no-limit and am still very proud of it. Also, is Alan Goldberg dead? I haven't heard from him or heard anything about him in 20 years.===Doyle Brunson
Welcome to this side of the forum Mr. Brunson. Be looking forward hear some interesting stories and hand histories played in your poker career.
You'll get the deserved respect on these forums. About Alan Goldberg haven't heard that name mentioned in quite a while.
mr brunson sir: We wish you would contribute to this site...I especially agree that the first section of your book will never be outdated...gl
It is an honor and a privilege to have one of the greatest poker players of all time grace this forum. Last year when I was playing at the Bellagio, I often saw you play $1500-$3000 (mixed games-I guess??) in the high limit area. I hope you never run bad.
Doyle,
your reputation has crossed the oceans. Even in Europe you are a big legend.
Please keep posting at this forum.
A french fan.
Mr. Brunson,
Thank you so much for your contributions to poker. I'm 23, and I recently bought S/S on eBay. I think it's an outstanding book, and I study it in earnest. Hopefully I'll be half the player you and your collaboraters are. Super/System's still an outstanding book. Best of luck to you and your family.
Scott
"So Doyle and I were chatting on 2+2 the other day, and he said I played the hand great and he hoped he never had to go heads up with me..."
Whoa, just woke up.
This would be like getting free golf tips online from Nicklaus or bridge advice from Bobby Wolff.
Doyle, I'm coming down from Canada to Vegas this weekend. If I bring my clubs, can we go out to Shadow Creek? I haven't played since late September, so I'll be a real pigeon Pleeeeeese.
Seriously, it would be very interesting and informative to read your insights into hands on this forum. Please don't be a stranger.
Being a player that appreciates No Limit Hold 'Em more than ANY other card game in the world, it is my greatest wish that you contribute to the High Stakes Forum on this site. Your insights would be invaluable to me. My grandfather Herman Weisehan (who has since passed on) was a great admirer of yours and taught me damn near everything I know. He was just a card player from Missouri who got around to Vegas every once in a while, and if there is one thing he ever taught me, it was to play like you.
Welcome to this site, and I hope you stick around. By the way, Super/System is one damn hard book to find, but a good one.
www.conjelco.com
They'll ship it to you in a week or so.
Just a tip if anyone wanted to get it but was having a hard time finding it.
natedogg