|
|
#71
06-25-2007, 04:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
[ QUOTE ]
The book certainly has some value, but sorting through it and trying to determine what is "good" advice and what is "bad" may be beyond a lot of beginner's capabilities... [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. Some of the advice is just bad. Consider this example. You have AKo. The flop is QT7 rainbow. (ed: You have no idea what the preflop action was on this hand, other than a vague speculation that you raised because the author implies this hand should be raised. You have no idea how many opponents you have, or if anyone else raised.) Except for certain exceptions based on players who bluff frequently, "This hand must be checked, if we can. If we're bet into, we will usually throw it away. We have only [2 cards coming to pair our ace or king], and we will have to pay for each draw. We have a 12.7% chance of catching an ace or king on the turn, and less chance on the river. Anybody even think about the inside draw to the straight? Then go back [to the beginning of the book] and start over. We have an 8.5% chance of making the straight. Even adding it to the 12.7% chance of catching an ace or king, we're the underdog against a small pair." So basically, without considering the size of the pot, the size of the bet, the number of opponents you have, your position, or the tendencies of your opponents (for example to pay you off if you hit), you are just supposed to fold your 10 outs (assuming you don't have the best hand right now) if bet into. A smaller detail is that your 12.7% chance of hitting an ace or king on the turn does not go down on the river, it goes up. Actually it's closer to 12.8% on the turn, and if you miss the turn, it's 13% for the river. (6/47 on the turn, 6/46 on the river.) Further bizarre advice is that playing in loose passive games is a waste of time. He suggests that your "power image" or "dominating" game style cannot be utilized in such a game. So? Loose passive games can be very profitable. He suggests simply going home if the game turns loose/passive. If you feel you must play, wait until you win one nice pot, and then leave, because winning that one pot might be the peak of your evening. I can understand an author saying that a "dominator" strategy is not optimal for such a game, but to imply that we can only play one style, or that the game is unprofitable by its nature, is absurd. It's things like these that take away from the overall confidence I have in the text. Although some of the advice is still interesting to me. But I'm not a beginner and I can filter. 
|
|
#72
06-25-2007, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
Gotta hate those loose passive games ... good jub Frist with killing Party and thus removing a good deal of those [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#74
06-25-2007, 06:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
it is my understanding from reading the book that later on pot odds, and implied odds are taken in account.
that example which is at the beginning is an example of how to play tight first so beginners can learn then they can learn other styles. as this book is about domination,, any other style that could do well at a loose and passive table isn't covered, and why should the dominator be playing no fold them, hold them , when there could be a softer table elsewhere. heck go home and find such a table online. eheh
|
|
#75
06-25-2007, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
Yeah, the whole point Sam makes is how to establish, maintain and then exploit a particular table image. You send the other players at the table a message - You get involved in a pot with me, and it will cost you all of your chips.
Then you go looking for people who don't want to play pots for all their chips, and use a combination of position and aggression to beat them up and take their money. The unrepentant table bully, beating up the smaller, weaker kids and stealing their milk money. Third grade recess, all over again. I don't think Sam ever said this was the only way to play NL cash games, but it's a good way. And for $1/$2 & $2/$5 live games, it's a real good way.
|
|
#76
06-25-2007, 07:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
[ QUOTE ]
Further bizarre advice is that playing in loose passive games is a waste of time. He suggests that your "power image" or "dominating" game style cannot be utilized in such a game. So? Loose passive games can be very profitable. He suggests simply going home if the game turns loose/passive. If you feel you must play, wait until you win one nice pot, and then leave, because winning that one pot might be the peak of your evening. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I don't think Sam ever said this was the only way to play NL cash games, but it's a good way. And for $1/$2 & $2/$5 live games, it's a real good way. [/ QUOTE ] Man, if you don't think the 1-2 live games are loose passive, where do you think these games are?
|
|
#78
06-25-2007, 08:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
i'm somewhat confused and haven't seen the example in full (although the poster said it didn't give details)..
what kind of game does the author like if he doesn't like loose-passive?? and, as per the example, i'd be very inclined to fold after being bet into with more 1 or 2 more callers around (example didn't give details). .... also, i'd be a little concerned that the paired A or K on turn wouldn't be good. with all due respect, the fact that % improves on turn is very nit-ish..... the turn often changes everything anyway. then i'm extremely worried my pair A/K isn't good.
|
|
#79
06-25-2007, 09:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
Jim, you're connecting some odd dots.
Sam outlines his style of how to play live, low limit NL cash games. I think he does a good job outlining his style of play (Table Bullies r' Us) and I also think it's a style that can take home money at low buy-in B&M NL tables. I'm not saying that he isn't giving some "controversial" advice sometimes. Particularly for this forum. And I've sent him PMs telling him what criticisims he can expect from us. The thing to keep in mind is that this book is over 400 pages. The first 225 are all "foundational." That is, foundational to a table bully's style of play. The "meat" of this book starts around page 230 and goes for another 150 pages. I have found this very worth while. In fact, I think my previous assesment of "As good as Killer Poker No Limit" is very unfair, since How to Dominate has more poker content than the whole Killer Poker series.
|
|
#80
06-25-2007, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How to Dominate $1 and $2 No Limit Hold\'em
[ QUOTE ]
it is my understanding from reading the book that later on pot odds, and implied odds are taken in account. that example which is at the beginning is an example of how to play tight first so beginners can learn then they can learn other styles. as this book is about domination,, any other style that could do well at a loose and passive table isn't covered, and why should the dominator be playing no fold them, hold them , when there could be a softer table elsewhere. heck go home and find such a table online. eheh [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about? Online games are tight. How much "softer" does it get than loose passive? Finally, the fact that the book teaches "domination" is beside the point. The point is he tells you the games are a waste of time, and that if you win a pot you should quit for the night because it might be the only one you win.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
