[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
I have also stopped looking at winrates and pokerev stuff and my cashier and I am now focusing on making sure I don't screw up by doing hardcore session reviews after each session and making sure I am learning from my mistakes. When I started doing session reviews back in May I was averaging about 30% losses due to mistakes on losing hands and losing about 20% of value on my winning hands due to mistakes. Thats now down to only losing 20% or less to mistakes on losing hands and maybe missing at the most 10% of value of value. Huge improvement and my game shows it too.

Plus I am thinking so much deeper when I play and analyze my hands it scares me sometimes. I constantly feel like I am over thinking and it sometimes becomes a mindtrip. Just wish I knew the right balance for the opponents I am playing but at NL10 there are the ones who only play their cards then you got the ones who put you on a hand then you got the ones who try and think what you think. Takes a little bit to figure out the last two. I just default to the I got this, I think they got this, and my hand looks like this to them.

[/ QUOTE ]


I can't remember who (maybe fraac), but in the book forum someone flamed the sklansky multible level chapther claiming that you are not playing different levels, either you are playing (on) or not (off).


And in many ways this is not far off and imo might be a better illustration of how to approach NLH. I mean, I'm never going, he thinks, so I think, so he thinks, so ... etc.

It is more ... his range seems to be '....', so therefore I am probably ahead .. or so therefore I can probably get away with firing three barrels, as that range can withstand much heat.

After a while if I pulled some wierd [censored], then I reestimate his range (or rather ranges, betting range, calling range and raising range)


But in this there really aren't many regression like the multilevel thinking described here on 2+2 in the old days (around 1-2 years ago ... hehe ... the old days) or sklanskys book. It is more a question of estimating ranges and probabilities (and balance suddenly comes into the picture)


I might be on a wrong track here, but well .... (and there is some guessing and dancing, but it is all about estimating what range villian perceives you on and what ranges you estimate he is on)


As usual I rant, but oh well ...