after a week of thinking i finally realise.....

[john kane]

the last week or so ive thought more about poker theory than i have in the whole of 2007, mainly becuase previously ive been chugging along at a nice hourly rate.
Well that started to change in late June so recently I figured I would decide what was going wrong. (although not seriously going wrong, part of it has just been bad luck and playing so few hands, although i haven't been playing well, and ive known it, which --> playing less)

This led me down the theory path (urgghh...). As some of you would of read this led to my post about bluffing (the flawed theory) and how if I were bluffing the same $ amounts as I was value betting, then what really was the point.

Well, I'm now figuring (as some of you may of put in your reply, I remember DLizzle commenting on this) that it really is a game of the subconscious yo-yo.

Now I know the other post, nor this one, will be enlightening to many of you, but it helps to get my poker brain in gear, and may help a few other think about their game.

Anyways, I guess rather than me thinking 'what is the point if i'm betting the same as a bluff as with value' that I didn't include the subconscious. That part of you which having spent over a thousand hours multitabling the same limits tells you when you should slow down and stop bluffing for a bit and the other part which tells you to speed up becuase nobody is paying you off.

I think the problem is that my conscious part took over from reading a lot of posts on here taken in a 'one hand context'. I know that may sound like I'm saying this forum made me worse, I would never imply that, the advice I've gotten over the years on this forum has been incredible. However, I think when I went through a short downswing I looked to change my game. In general the posts on here are all very aggressive/the big pots of the day, and so it's easy to get locked into a mindset of 'i need to make these plays as standard'. instead i think i should be looking to adapting as the game goes on, when i see my image is too tight then loosen up, and vice versa.

for sure this is elementary theory, something you would read in a basic poker book, but i think i fell into the mindset of trying to play a rigid game whereby implementing aggressive plays just becuase i'd seen them on twoplustwo made by a decent regular, rather than becuase my image was tight and the player would likely fold.

anyways, i won't be playing for a while, im going to carry on trying to improve my game, but i just think it's important that i remember not to try to implement set plays just becuase they are perceived to be 'sick ' plays but instead focus on changing gears when the your image requires you to do so, if that means make a 'sick' play becuase my image is tight and the opponent will likely fold, then so be it, but not when it's the first or second orbit of the table just becuase i read that sick play earlier in the day.

ty for your tolerance if you read this and ty for your help. ill be saying to myself 'remember what you table image is and if you can get away with a bluff, do so, if not, be patient.' basic yep, but if i dont do this i dont win.

[tuckercat]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the problem is that my conscious part took over from reading a lot of posts on here taken in a 'one hand context'. However, I think when I went through a short downswing I looked to change my game. In general the posts on here are all very aggressive/the big pots of the day, and so it's easy to get locked into a mindset of 'i need to make these plays as standard'. instead i think i should be looking to adapting as the game goes on, when i see my image is too tight then loosen up, and vice versa.

[/ QUOTE ]

it might seem elementary, but this actually makes a lot of sense. quite enlightening actually. nice post.

[Jamougha]

plz delete your post

[Christophers]

t l d r

[jfish]

youre saying balance timing tells? i just skimmed that but its hard to see where you get to the point.

[coxquinn]

[ QUOTE ]
youre saying balance timing tells? i just skimmed that but its hard to see where you get to the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol what?

[tcorbin16]

JOOOOOOOOOOOOHNNNNNNNNNNNNNN KAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[cianosheehan]

nice post

[jfish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
youre saying balance timing tells? i just skimmed that but its hard to see where you get to the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol what?

[/ QUOTE ]

eh whatever.

[john kane]

thanks for replies, yeah the post was rambly, i was thinking and posting at same time. basically can be summed up as:

[ QUOTE ]
remember not to try to implement given plays just becuase they are perceived to be 'sick ' plays but instead focus on changing gears when the your image requires you to do so, if that means make a 'sick' play becuase my image is tight and the opponent will likely fold, then so be it, but not when it's the first or second orbit of the table just becuase i read that sick play earlier in the day.

remember what your table image is and if you can get away with a bluff, do so, if not, be patient.' basic yep, but if i dont do this i dont win.


[/ QUOTE ]

gl all.

ps. i have edited the quote for spelling and shortened it a bit.