Rizen just wrote a great article on P5's...

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
of course, you could just play a sick, unexploitable style, if you want mediocre results.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP (unless of course you're playing hu with aba/antonius/etc. in which case yay for you!)

[JSchnett]

my strategy is to stay so far behind that my old strats are the new cutting edge strats once again.

[Pudge714]

Nice article, but after reading the OP I expected it to be groundbreaking.

[NHFunkii]

I dunno, if you're playing truly unexploitably at all times, I'm pretty sure your results would be phenomenal

[pokerraja]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice article, but after reading the OP I expected it to be groundbreaking.

[/ QUOTE ]

i haven't read it yet but i also was/am expecting it to be groundbreaking after reading op's rant.

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
I dunno, if you're playing truly unexploitably at all times, I'm pretty sure your results would be phenomenal

[/ QUOTE ]

No one can really quantify what playing unexploitably is, so it's obviously somewhat up to interpretation, but I disagree (if we ignore things like tilt that normally hurt a good player's win rate). You end up making so many mistakes (at non super tough games) that your winrate would almost certainly be lower than a good regular. I used this example in another thread about this, but think about when you have two nits sitting to your left. You are going to be making so so many mistakes when it's folded to you on the button (not raising enough, calling 3bets too much, 4betting too much, etc.) Obviously you'll still be making money in that spot, but significantly less. I think the same principle holds pretty much whoever is at the table, assuming you play better than them.

edit: sorry for the hijack, it was a good article rizen [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Steve

[luckychewy]

i agree with steve. playing unexploitably vs. people who will try to exploit you is good. playing unexploitably vs. donks who will not exploit you and in turn make much bigger mistakes themselves is fine.

basically, i think playing unexploitably under all circumstances is +ev, but playing 'exploitably'(taking transparent lines or making plays that good players would very easily exploit) vs. donks who won't realize this stuff is more +ev.

[Ansky]

[ QUOTE ]
I dunno, if you're playing truly unexploitably at all times, I'm pretty sure your results would be phenomenal

[/ QUOTE ]

nah not in tournaments, i think this is incorrect.

[aejones]

it's the theory of optimal play, a sklansky thing, but it's readable obv

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dunno, if you're playing truly unexploitably at all times, I'm pretty sure your results would be phenomenal

[/ QUOTE ]

nah not in tournaments, i think this is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you have way more experience in cash games than me so I could be off, but...don't situations like my two nits to your left example come up all the time in cash games? Aren't there people who you 3bet way too light because they just don't play back enough? etc. I think it applies close to as much at cash as tournaments.

Steve