Is it possible to mimic winning player?

[RichGambler]

Recently I had discussion with my coach if thats a good way to become a good winning player if you copying someone stats and trying to play exactly the same style like someone with very good win rate say 5PTBB+/100 at high levels.

He said that I should have my own style. But I believe there is always easier to make a copy of something which already works then invent something new with a lot of trial and error and discover on your own whats already been discovered.

It's hard for a brain to learn whenever there is no linear logic involved. And thats what NL is about.

For example you have 88 in late position there are 3 limpers before you. What is the best way to play this situation in the long run? raise 4x +1 limper or limp along.

Say you played 10 times with 4x+1 limper and 10 times you limped along.

1st situation they folded 2 times preflop 3 times you made a stab at the pot was re raised on flop 1 time you got set you bet and he folded and other times you made a bet and he folded as well.

In the 2nd scenario you didnt get set until 8th time and that 8th time BB got 2 pair vs your set and you stacked him.

If you would've raised huge BB would've folded.

Can brain make an optimal decision how to play 88 in this situation based on the final results? Not really. Because there is not enough data and too much confusion.

Its hard for a brain to come up with the "what if scenarios" when so much data is missing.

But I believe poker is a mathematic game.

Vegas is build mostly on 0.5%-5.26%+ advantage and taking down billions of $$$$ from gamblers.

When you play poker you have some edge % vs opponent strategy I believe it's within 4% at high levels.

Some x strategy vs Y strategy yields %+ advantage and thats how you make $$$.

So your x strategy can be winning vs y strategy but losing vs z strategy. So you need to find some optimal strategy which yields best %+ vs those 2 strategies together.

My coach said that 21/18 guy can be winning and 21/18 other guy can be losing and of course it true because they will be different in so many stats.
21/18/4AF might be different from 21/18/1AF so there are a lot of other stats which can have drastic results.
Lets see where 21/18 and 21/18 can be different.


1 Raise amount.( one guy 4x another 3x)
2. Cbet (1 guy 80% 2 60%)
3. Cbet amount (1 guy 2/3 pot+ another guy 1/2 pot+)
4. Betting the draw and checking the draw.
5. 1st guy might be raising all broad way + small pairs 2nd guy might like to raise suited broad way + small pairs + suited connectors and double gappers. Even though their PRF will be the same.
5 Raising on the draw in position and just calling on the draw
6. ATS 30%(attempt to steal for 1 guy and 15% ATS for other guy)
7. Raising less hands in UTG and makig more lose raises in later positions and 2nd guy raises same hands in all positions even though their PFR might be the same.
8.Difference between Went to showdown.
9 Difference between folded BB and SB to steal 1 guy might have 85% other guy 75%
10 Difference in how they protect their blinds. how often they 3 bet, just flat call, check raise amount of flop, lead on flop and so on.
11 Are they making moves with hands which have small showdown value( 1st might have 84s there is 3x raise 3x call 3x call if guy believe that initial raises ir LAP and might fold he can make 15x raise and scoop 9x pot most of the time)
2nd guy aren't making those plays.
12.1 guy might be laying down QQ vs tight players 2nd player pushes with QQ.
13. 1s guy whenever raises might be raising 4x+ 1 limper 2nd guy raises 4x all the time no matter what hand he has.
14. 1st guy makes CB vs 2 guys once in a while 2nd guy never makes CB vs 2 guys if he has nothing on flop after raise.
15 1st guy slow playing hands vs aggressive guys in position 2nd guy plays fast and re raises strong hands vs LAG's)
16. Pushing all in with combo draws and just calling with combo draw and trying to hit something.
And many other things
17. 1st guy might make adjustments based on what kind of table he is 2nd guy might be playing same game all the time.
18 1st guy might be limping AA KK AK 30% of the time UTG and making huge re raise if someone raises 2nd guy might raise there hands all the time
And other things.

I honestly believe that if those 2 guys would try to find the difference the way they play in all these things and 2nd guy would try to get closer to 1st guy play he would become a winning player with 90% correlation in 1st guy results.

Discuss.
Thanks

[ocdscale]

No, because there are too many stats.
It's not even just the quantitative statistics, notice almost all 18 of the situations you mentioned have to do with your cards in a near vacuum.
If every time I were in a hand, I could data-mine handhistories of top pros and do whatever they did based on their cards and the board, I'd almost certainly be a loser over the long term. Their choices depend on a lot more than simply the cards in their hand and on the board.

So no, it's not as simple as making a chart telling you when to raise/shove/3bet/steal, etc.

[RichGambler]

[ QUOTE ]
No, because there are too many stats.
It's not even just the quantitative statistics, notice almost all 18 of the situations you mentioned have to do with your cards in a near vacuum.
If every time I were in a hand, I could data-mine handhistories of top pros and do whatever they did based on their cards and the board, I'd almost certainly be a loser over the long term. Their choices depend on a lot more than simply the cards in their hand and on the board.

So no, it's not as simple as making a chart telling you when to raise/shove/3bet/steal, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

You wouldnt be able to datamine top pros and see what they did. Because you get to see their hands only if they go to showdown or show the hand after everybody folded.

[sick!]

Well first of all, poker is a situational game. Each hand may seem to be the same on the surface, can be totally different based on opponents, position, chip stacks and many other factors.

Second, doing something because a top pro does it without knowing the why behind is a recipe for disaster.

With that said, you can mimic a style to a certain point and have a certain amount of success. For example most books tell you to play TAG. The reason, it will give the player a certain base to build off of. It's like building a foundation of a house. But that's all it is. To grow as a player, each player has to find what works for them based on each players talents and abilities.

[RichGambler]

[ QUOTE ]
Well first of all, poker is a situational game. Each hand may seem to be the same on the surface, can be totally different based on opponents, position, chip stacks and many other factors.

Second, doing something because a top pro does it without knowing the why behind is a recipe for disaster.

With that said, you can mimic a style to a certain point and have a certain amount of success. For example most books tell you to play TAG. The reason, it will give the player a certain base to build off of. It's like building a foundation of a house. But that's all it is. To grow as a player, each player has to find what works for them based on each players talents and abilities.

[/ QUOTE ]


There is no NL holdem 6 max book. None.

Books teach ABC game. Raise premium hands, charge big draws and stuff and etc.

And do not call draws when there is no pot odds to draw.

Thats about it.

But there is no books which explain how to play in different situations.

Here is what happens.

Example

100 players start learning NL holdem and read same stuff. Let say they are equally smart.

Say they will play 1st 5k hands and apply same strategy.

But they all be at different tables with different players some will run hot some will run cold.

After 5k hands you will see that they were using same strategy but some made $$$ some didnt. Those who were winning keep yousing it. Those who lost they will start to think that since they didn't make
$$$$ in 5k hands they need to do something differently so they start to develop new ways how to play but they arent sure what they need to do and there is no way to see results immediatly once they changed strategy they need to experiment again.

Say there is a limper with 40/10 on the table and you have JTs on the button you raise 5x flop comes 369 he checks you bet 8x he raises 22x obviously you fold.
Now at this point you dont know whether he outplayed you or hit big hand.

So lets say he limps again you get 88 you raise 5x flop K24 you think this time its just 1 over so you bet 8x he calls turn comes J and he leads OOP for 16x can you call here? Obviously not so you fold again.

3rd time you get AJ off he limps again you raise 5x that limper reraises 15x. This is the 1st time he makes move like that whats your play? Is he making a move because he saw that you raising a lot or can he have a big hand here?

I doubt if you place any pro in this situation he would be able to make better desicion than you are.

In other words holdem NL is so difficult to learn by yourself because there is so much incompltete information.

Even when you post hands on 2+2 and guys giving different advices on some specific hand.. 1 says bet more, 2nd sayd I would push here 3. guy says check to induce bluff. Which answer is correct?How can you know
which guy is the biggest winner in those games? Are those guys who give advices winning players? Are they better then you?

Thats why learning NL is so confusing and it's easier to learn someone style which was build by a lot of trial and error and if you mimic someone style and stats and he is 5PTBB/100 winner it's bigger chance that you will become
4PTBB/100+ winner and understand logic behind that instead of trying to improve your 2.5PTBB/100 style and you'll try to find out what you need to do to incerease your win rate.

Here is the part I'm struggling. I been playing poker semi pro for 3 yrs. Havent had lossing month in this period.

Was playing within 0.5NL-10/20NL in this period.

Biggest win was 14k month at 2/4NL after which I decided to go to 10/20NL where I lost like 10k in 3 days so then I went back to 1NL build my BR and started grinding 2/4NL won 12k went to 3/6NL lost like 4k in 3 days. Went down to 1/2NL just bunch of bad beats. Went down to 0.5/1NL and decided to grind there and do not try to move up. Because whenever I come to higher level there is differently another game and when I try to play my game it doesn't fit there.

So basicly I was 6 tabling 1NL for a yr making about 4000$+ month including rakeback. THen once after grinding for a yr I went to 1/2NL beat that game for 3PTBB/100 then went to 2/4NL beat that game for 2.5PTBB/100 then went to 3/6NL and lost 6 buy ins in 4 days.

And then decided grind at 0.5/1NL again.

Currently Im at 0.5/1 6 max And want to move up to 1/2NL 6 max but Im so fed up with the with working for 1 month then dumping half of the earnings in 1 week at higher level..

[sick!]

I agree, there's no book that can teach how to play in all situations. But as I said, it's a base (inferior as it may be) from which new players can learn from and have limited success.

Again, poker is a situational game. This means there may not always be one correct answer to a given situation. That's why different styles can be successful. Mimic a good players style will give you a certain amount of success but you have to understand the why. As you stated, given a particular strategy some will make money and others may not. Take for example, raising 3x with aces. Simple straight forward. But this strategy may not work in all cases. If you've got a table of loose callers for sure they'll call your 3x bet and suck out on you. A good player will know how to adjust. A bad player won't. Yet they both followed a basic strategy.

Obviously learning from a good player you will get better. Take for example Barry Greenstein and his son Joe Sebok. Joe wouldn't have gotten so good so fast without Barry's help. Just being able to watch Barry play, Joe is able to advance his poker knowledge light years ahead of if he was buy himself. But if you look at their styles, they play quite differently.

Based on what you've posted, I think your running into the following problems:
1) bankroll management - you keep jumping into games where your bankroll can't sustain the losses. You need at least 15-20 buy-ins at any given level
2) patience - see 1) plus the higher you go the tougher the competition. What works at a lower level may not work at a higher level. Playing at 2/4 NL is much different than playing 10/20 NL. The players that play 10/20 are mostly established pros.
3) There's nothing wrong with taking shots, but you have to know to step down when your losing. Obviously your losing for a reason. Watching players at the next level play will help you adjust.

It sounds like you've had success at certain levels up to this point. You just need to adjust your game. Listen to your coach. Ask him to analyze the hands that you've played and see where your weak. For example, maybe your playing too tight. Could that be because your playing too high for your bankroll. Not raising enough. Raising too much. Calling too much. Blindly following a particular style or play can/will only take you so far. Players at higher levels will figure out what your doing, adjust and take advantage.

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
Currently Im at 0.5/1 6 max And want to move up to 1/2NL 6 max but Im so fed up with the with working for 1 month then dumping half of the earnings in 1 week at higher level..

[/ QUOTE ]

Takes a few tries sometimes. Not everyone breezes from .25/.50 to 1k/2k.