PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

I'd like to start this thread by thanking Matt, Sunny & Ed for the excelent job they did on Professional No Limit. I'm looking forward to vol 2.

In other threads, many people have commented on what they want to see in vol 2. Several posters have stated that they would like to see vol 2 focus entirely on 6-max.

This is an extention on the whole 6-max vs FR issue, or what I have dubbed "the Jocks vs the Nerds." Some people don't like my name for the issue. All I have to say is that some people commenting one way or the other show far less maturity than I would expect from a typicle high school kid.

Vol I of PNL is excellent. Great job, guys. You have provided a framework for thinking about NL problems that readers can apply to any NL situation.

Now, you have stated that you have much more in you, much more that can be said about NL hold'em that currently just doesn't appear in print anywhere. I'm going to ask you guys to please keep going on the track you're going. Include as much broad spectrum information in vol II as you can.

And then, I'm going to plead with you to do an entire book dedicated to 6-max.

I'm asking this mostly as a FR player, not a 6-max player. I'd prefer PNL vol II to be a more general book, devoted to principles that apply to all NL situations rather than situations that only arrise on a 6-max table.

However, I do recognise that most pro cash game players play 6-max, since it offers them the greatest oportunity to outplay weak players after the flop when the mistakes are most expensive. Therefore, 6-max really does deserve in depth treatment. And I belive, after reading PNL vol I, that you guys are eminently qualified to address this huge gap in poker litrature.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

At a full table the players preflop edge is very big, so play becomes more player dependent and this more demanding and fun

- Aba20 (my wording from memory)

It is one game whether you play short of full, shorthanded players have a tendency to get easily bored at full tables as there is less room to operate on.

But you are right, the book should be on NL hold'em not NL hold'em with six players seated or something like that.

Still I like Matt and Sunny to have a shorthanded focus as I feel Sklanky has the market cornered on limping say 77 in mp and checking three streets to extract after flopping top set advice.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
I feel Sklanky has the market cornered on limping say 77 in mp and checking three streets to extract after flopping top set advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

Not entirely sure what that quote has to do with my OP, but thanks, Gel, for driving home the "Jocks vs Nerds" point for me.

I think I saw one of the kids from the school band behind the library. Why don't you go make fun of his tuba?

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

No comment on Jocks vs. Nerds, but I definitely support keeping Vol. 2 general as opposed to a having a 6-max focus. As a B&M player, I find myself in both full and short games all the time and I am much more likely to purchase a book covering either full or both full and short than a book that's only good for me after 3am. Thanks for listening.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

Heh Phy, those 6-max games must have scared you [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]



But I predict that in 3-6 months time, you'll grow bored of full ring and will be back crushing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

Let me also toss my vote in for volume two to NOT be focused on 6 max. I agree, there is certainly a market for 6-max books and who better to write one then the folks that have brought us the outstanding work in PNL Volume 1, however, please, please do it outside of the PNL series. A chapter, sure makes sense, but I do think it would hurt the series to dedicate the entire volume 2 to such a specific area. Almost like if Harrington dedicated volume two to turbo rebuys or something.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

I'll throw a vote in for anything 6-max thru HU, if you're going to cover NLHE cash at all. 6-max player may never sit at FR, but every online player will have to play a short table from time to time. UNless, you leave every time it gets short.

If you have a couple goofballs at the table and a few seats become vacant (and remain so for a while), are you going to leave these guys just because you're only 6 handed?

Plus, how much material do you need to cover playing the early positions in a FR game?

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

What is "Jocks vs Nerds"? I understand the rest of your post, but I don't understand the title of the post at all. Are you saying jocks play one type of game and nerds play another? Is this a common shorthand from one of the forums I don't read or something?

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]

What is "Jocks vs Nerds"? I understand the rest of your post, but I don't understand the title of the post at all. Are you saying jocks play one type of game and nerds play another? Is this a common shorthand from one of the forums I don't read or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of good NL cash game players, and most NL cash game pros, play 6-max. This is for several good reasons that I won't get into right now. However many players, myself included, prefer to play FR NL cash games.

This has lead to a dynamic, at least on this forum, where the "cool kids" play 6-max, and if you play NL cash games but you don't play 6-max then you're just not one of the cool kids. Further some 6-max players, at least the ones with little more maturity than your average 14 year-old pimple factory, are fond of making long and elaborate posts on why 6-max players are the best and most skilled players and how anyone who plays FR will never approach the skill level of a 6-max player. And of course the favorite place for these 6-max players to post their boasts and taunts is in the FR strategy forum.

I have observed that this is little different from the jocks vs nerds taunting and bullying common in high schools and jr. high schools. So far as I know I'm the only one who calls it this. I hope the name catches on, because I think it's particularly appropriate.

So when Matt & Sunny asked what readers wanted to see in vol II of PNL and several "jocks" said that they wanted vol II to be 100% 6-max, I made this tread asking them to make vol II more general but to then go ahead and write another book devoted entirely to 6-max. I believe 6-max deserves through treatment, but I think that vol II would be better if, like vol I, it is full of concepts that can apply to any NL situation.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

You mean the same way that NL players think that they are better people for not playing Limit?

The people are all ignorant, there is not a huge gap between 6-max and FR, and not a huge gap between Limit and Capped NL games.

It is all poker, it's like cars, yes, some may want to drive a stick and others an automatic, some people like compacts and others like large cars, it's all driving, yeah, we may have to make adjustments, but cars like poker, just what one prefers is what one prefers and can show a lot about our selves and insecurities.

Whatever, I like all the forms of all the poker games, (excluding limit Omaha) and have the most love for heads-up Limit. Am I cooler or nerdier for it? It doesn't matter because I withdraw money, not deposit.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

I play FR all the time, and you constantly hear things like "no one who plays FR is good at poker." and "six max is REAL poker".

I heard the same things when I was mainly a tournament player about cash games vs. tournaments.

No matter what, I fear I'm destined to be playing these "lesser" form of poker no matter what I choose.

I really hope there isn't a 6 max only book, nor would I want a FR book. The more generic the better, IMHO, because who knows what the latest "fad" will be in 5 years? A book that teaches principles that can be applied to most games is more beneficial in the long run than one which focuses on a small segment of what is popular today.

I once asked a good 6 max player why 6 max is more profitable, and he said "because that's where the fish are. If fish started playing FR more, there wouldn't ever be a reason for a winning player to play 6 max again." I don't have any experience to back this up, but it is a poster I respect (and also, it's the only answer that makes sense). If it is true, though, it just underscores the point that we need to be fully equipped to handle the changing nature of poker.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
I made this tread asking them to make vol II more general but to then go ahead and write another book devoted entirely to 6-max.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can never fill a whole book with only 6-max concepts. As has been mentioned eariler many people have a hard time to realize that the concepts for FR and 6-max are almost indentical. The only big difference is PF and game conditions. Generally 6-max players are much looser even postflop.

And if you didn't know you play 6-max all the time in FR games. Every time the first four players fold only 6 players remain.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

Short-handed situations definitely deserve coverage. Even when you try to play full-ring, there are always times when there are open seats (both live and online).

That being said, I hope Vol II covers other topics besides just short-handed/6-max. Knowledge about that is just part of being a well-rounded cash game player.

I think one of the co-authors previously indicated somewhere that Vol II will cover bluffing and c-betting in more detail. I'd like to see that examined in a wide range of scenarios (not just short-handed).

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

I vote for 6 max. I think anyone who is striving to be a top earner playing NL is going to want to play 6 max. I also think that most of the concepts for 6 max may apply to FR. 6 max is a new form of poker and many old schoolers don't want to put the effort in to relearn a game. I imagine Super System has enough info to make anyone profitable playing FR. 6 max is a very tough game and it would be nice to have an expert lead us. 2+2 has always been on the cutting edge and needs to produce a book on 6 max. Log into FT and see how many 6 max games are going vs. FR. Then make a list of all the books that are written on 6 max vs. FR. It looks like 6 max would clearly be the most marketable product. Any serious FR player would read it anyway.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

Hi from Chester, California.

On vacation here at Lake Almanor with no internet access at the house, only at the coffee shops in town. (Coffee Station for any locals out there.}

I think of it as "Will this hand be profitable? If so, how should I play it to maximize profit?" That concept applies from 2 to 9 opponents. In general, in 6-max, you have less chance of running into AA-QQ, more aggression preflop with wider ranges, and a little more aggression postflop, with some players going nuts. So, you adapt. In general, you still want position, you will get all-in more often on average than with FR, variance goes up, and the temptation to spew and be inappropriately hyperaggro goes up for some people.

The question with 6-max is specifically adapting to the differences. REM and SPR offer a start. I'll write more about specific adaptation to 6-max in volume 2 unless Sunny beats me to the chapter. Hopefully that will be helpful.

I here the generalists loud and clear, and the 6-maxists. What would be more interesting to me is a book on Adapting, not just to 6-max but to any game.

Matt

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

First....I haven't read PNL yet. I preordered from Amazon but no sign of shipping yet.

But I would almost certain buy PNL Vol. 2 if it is not 6-max specific. If it was just about 6-max, I would almost certainly NOT buy it.

This is for the simple reason that 6-max has no application to the games that I play in, which are in casinos. I have yet to find a 6-max game spread in cash games or tournaments.

I hope the authors realize that whatever the title of their book, most of the people who will buy the book are not professional players, and really do not intend to become professional players. Certain, most professional players will be interested in this book, but they will be far outnumbered by the people who just play recreationally (either live or online), and who are not about to seek out a new game just because their might be more money in it for those willing to put serious study in.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
You mean the same way that NL players think that they are better people for not playing Limit?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, exactly.

Speaking as a former limit specialist, many uninformed NL players read Super/System and latch onto Doyle's comments about limit players not having "guts." Frankly, I think it's much harder to play limit well consistently over a long period of time.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
What would be more interesting to me is a book on Adapting, not just to 6-max but to any game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt, you & Sunny could write books and charge by the word and I will stand in like to pay you for them. You're a guy after my own heart.

Best of luck at the tables,

phy

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]

First....I haven't read PNL yet. I preordered from Amazon but no sign of shipping yet.

But I would almost certain buy PNL Vol. 2 if it is not 6-max specific. If it was just about 6-max, I would almost certainly NOT buy it.

This is for the simple reason that 6-max has no application to the games that I play in, which are in casinos. I have yet to find a 6-max game spread in cash games or tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree 100%.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
What would be more interesting to me is a book on Adapting, not just to 6-max but to any game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Spot on!!! To my limited understanding, winning poker is ALL about adapting. Loose vs. tight, passive vs. aggro, in all combinations of pre-flop and post-flop play at your table --how EXACTLY does it affect your game plan?

I'd definitely buy a book delving into this. I imagine such book would include sample hands from both 6-max and FR games.

<belgian/>

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You mean the same way that NL players think that they are better people for not playing Limit?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, exactly.

Speaking as a former limit specialist, many uninformed NL players read Super/System and latch onto Doyle's comments about limit players not having "guts." Frankly, I think it's much harder to play limit well consistently over a long period of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I started playing Limit and know what you are thinking. I then dipped in FR NL, then 6 max.

Remember that the vast majority of players here aren't winning anything, and when they talk smack, they have no appreciation for the over-all game. When they say that Limit is easy, they probably never tried playing it. When anyone says that one form of poker is easier, they are insulting anyone who has spent years mastering that form of poker.

I could go on and on, but if one of the "cool kids" sits at you FR game, you will probably crush them.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
if one of the "cool kids" sits at you FR game, you will probably crush them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if they don't make the correct adjustments.

If the cool kid had read PNL vol II, and if PNL vol II is all about adjustments, then they will, and I won't. But of course if I have, then I will. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
I made this tread asking them to make vol II more general but to then go ahead and write another book devoted entirely to 6-max. I believe 6-max deserves through treatment, but I think that vol II would be better if, like vol I, it is full of concepts that can apply to any NL situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you here, although I don't really think a 6 max book is needed. If you have a good understanding of no limit, then you have the ability to adapt. And you will then appreciate there not being a 6 max cookbook available to the public. I hope vol 2 will be like vol 1, with certain examples and sections relating to the 6 max arena to illustrate those general principles and adjustments in action. Helping to develop a well rounded understanding of poker that will help you adapt to any game or conditions.

I find it funny, all these people wanting books designed around various game conditions. Conditions that likely change over time, especially if cookbooks relating to those conditions are written. Learn to do it yourself by developing a fundamental understanding of big bet poker in general. Thats the kind of instruction that's best, and thankfully Matt and Sunny seem to be following that path. Doing it this way, rather than having a 6 max specific book available will prove much more beneficial and profitable.

Re: PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue
 

[ QUOTE ]
What would be more interesting to me is a book on Adapting, not just to 6-max but to any game.

Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad you have this view.